Thiotepa-busulfan-fludarabine (TBF) conditioning regimen in patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for myelofibrosis: an outcome analysis from the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the EBMT

Graft-versus-host disease and impact on relapse in myelofibrosis undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) remains the only curative treatment for myelofibrosis (MF). Relapse occurs in 10-30% and remains a major factor for dismal outcomes. Previous work suggested that graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) might be associated with risk of relapse. This study included 341 patients undergoing their first (n = 308) or second (n = 33) alloHSCT. Anti-T-lymphocyte or antithymocyte globulin was used for GVHD prophylaxis in almost all patients. Median time to neutrophile and platelet engraftment was 13 days and 19 days, respectively. The cumulative incidence of acute GVHD grade II-IV was 41% (median, 31 days; range, 7-112). Grade III-IV acute GVHD was observed in 22%. The cumulative incidence of chronic GVHD was 61%. Liver was affected in 23% of acute GVHD cases and 46% of chronic GVHD cases. Severe acute GVHD was associated with high non-relapse mortality. The development of acute GVHD grade II and moderate GVHD was an independent factor for reduced risk for relapse after transplantation without increased risk for non-relapse mortality, while especially acute GVHD grade IV was associated with high non-relapse mortality. Last, we identified that ongoing response to ruxolitinib, accelerated-phase MF at time of transplantation and splenectomy prior to transplantation were independent predictors for relapse.

The application of JAK inhibitors in the peri-transplantation period of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for myelofibrosis

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) with a poor prognosis, and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is the only treatment with curative potential. Ruxolitinib, a JAK1/2 inhibitor, has shown promising results in improving patients' symptoms, overall survival, and quality of life, and can be used as a bridging therapy to HSCT that increases the proportion of transplantable patients. However, the effect of this and similar drugs on HSCT outcomes is unknown, and the reports on their efficacy and safety in the peri-transplantation period vary widely in the published literature. This paper reviews clinical data related to the use of JAK inhibitors in the peri-implantation phase of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for primary myelofibrosis and discusses their efficacy and safety.

Treosulfan compared to busulfan in allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for myelofibrosis: a registry-based study from the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the EBMT

We aimed to compare outcomes following treosulfan (TREO) or busulfan (BU) conditioning in a large cohort of myelofibrosis (MF) patients from the EBMT registry. A total of 530 patients were included; 73 received TREO and 457 BU (BU ≤ 6.4 mg/kg in 134, considered RIC, BU > 6.4 mg/kg in 323 considered higher dose (HD)). Groups were compared using adjusted Cox models. Cumulative incidences of engraftment and acute GVHD were similar across the 3 groups. The TREO group had significantly better OS than BU-HD (HR:0.61, 95% CI: 0.39-0.93) and a trend towards better OS over BU-RIC (HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.41-1.05). Moreover, the TREO cohort had a significantly better Progression-Free-Survival (PFS) than both the BU-HD (HR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.38-0.84) and BU-RIC (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.39-0.91) cohorts, which had similar PFS estimates. Non-relapse mortality (NRM) was reduced in the TREO and BU-RIC cohorts (HR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.24-0.80 TREO vs BU-HD; HR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.28-1.04 TREO vs BU-RIC). Of note, relapse risk did not significantly differ across the three groups. In summary, within the limits of a registry-based study, TREO conditioning may improve PFS in MF HSCT and have lower NRM than BU-HD with a similar relapse risk to BU-RIC. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Characterization of engraftment dynamics in myelofibrosis after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation including novel conditioning schemes

Introduction

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a rare hematopoietic stem cell disorder progressing to bone marrow (BM) failure or blast phase. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) represents a potentially curative therapy for a limited subset of patients with advanced MF, who are eligible, but engraftment in MF vs. AML is delayed which promotes complications. As determinants of engraftment in MF are incompletely characterized, we studied engraftment dynamics at our center.

Methods

A longitudinal cohort of 71 allogeneic HCT performed 2000-2019 with >50% after 2015 was evaluated.

Results

Median time to neutrophil engraftment ≥0.5x109/l was +20 days post-transplant and associated with BM fibrosis, splenomegaly and infused CD34+ cell number. Engraftment dynamics were similar in primary vs. secondary MF and were independent of MF driver mutations in JAK2, CALR and MPL. Neutrophil engraftment occurred later upon haploidentical HCT with thiotepa-busulfan-fludarabine conditioning, post-transplant cyclophosphamide and G-CSF (TBF-PTCy/G-CSF) administered to 9.9% and 15.6% of patients in 2000-2019 and after 2015, respectively. Engraftment of platelets was similarly delayed, while reconstitution of reticulocytes was not affected.

Conclusions

Since MF is a rare hematologic malignancy, this data from a large number of HCT for MF is essential to substantiate that later neutrophil and platelet engraftment in MF relates both to host and treatment-related factors. Observations from this longitudinal cohort support that novel conditioning schemes administered also to rare entities such as MF, require detailed evaluation in larger, multi-center cohorts to assess also indicators of long-term graft function and overall outcome in patients with this infrequent hematopoietic neoplasm undergoing allogeneic transplantation.

Successful Outcome in Patients with Myelofibrosis Undergoing Allogeneic Donor Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Using Reduced-Doses of Post-Transplant Cyclophosphamide: challenges and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Engraftment and non-relapse mortality (NRM) greatly depend upon the transplant platform in patients with Myelofibrosis (MF).

OBJECTIVE

We report outcomes of 14 consecutive MF patients who received reduced doses of post-transplant Cyclophosphamide (PTCy) (60 mg/kg total dose) and tacrolimus as graft versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis as part of a new standardized allogeneic hematopoietic-cell transplantation (allo-HCT) protocol.

STUDY DESIGN

Median age at HCT was 59 years (range: 41-67), and median interval from diagnosis to HCT was 19 months (range: 2-114). All cases received ruxolitinib before HCT and 71% had no response. Most patients (78%) had symptomatic splenomegaly at HCT. Eighty-six percent received reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) and most of them (64%) from an unrelated donor.

RESULTS

There were not graft failures and neutrophil and platelet recovery occurred at a median of 21 and 31 days. The cumulative incidence of grade II-IV and III-IV acute GVHD was 28.6% and 7%. The 2-year incidence of overall and moderate-severe chronic GVHD was 36% and 14%. Only 1 patient relapsed after transplant, and NRM at 100 days and 2-years was 7% and 14%. GVHD-free/relapse-free and immunosuppression free incidence at 1 year was 41%. With a median follow-up for survivors of 28 months (range:8-55), the 2-year overall survival and progression-free survival are 86% and 69%.

CONCLUSION

Reduced doses of PTCy as GVHD prophylaxis for high risk MF patients shows promising results by reducing GVHD incidence without cases of graft failure.

Improving allogeneic stem cell transplantation in myelofibrosis

In this review, we will outline dimensions in which outcome of patients with myelofibrosis undergoing curative treatment can be optimized: patient selection, transplant procedure, and posttransplant prevention or treatment of relapse. For patient selection, fortunately, as with several other hematologic malignancies, the management of patients with myelofibrosis has very much entered the molecular era, with the establishment of several driver and nondriver mutations, allowing more individualized selection for treatment. For the transplant procedure itself, different conditioning intensities do not seem to play a distinctive role with regards to outcome posttransplant but still need to be compared in the molecular era. While many patients nowadays may receive ruxolitinib before transplant, recent studies may facilitate fine-tuning and integration of ruxolitinib into the transplant algorithm. The role of novel inhibitors for the transplant setting remains unclear. For the posttransplant phase, evidence remains scarce, with experiences of donor-lymphocyte infusions for relapse management but more efforts are needed in understanding relapse and identifying and treating patients at high risk for relapse.

How We Manage Myelofibrosis Candidates for Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation

Moving from indication to transplantation is a critical process in myelofibrosis. Most of guidelines specifically focus on either myelofibrosis disease or transplant procedure, and, currently, no distinct indication for the management of MF candidates to transplant is available. Nevertheless, this period of time is crucial for the transplant outcome because engraftment, non-relapse mortality, and relapse incidence are greatly dependent upon the pre-transplant management. Based on these premises, in this review, we will go through the path of identification of the MF patients suitable for a transplant, by using disease-specific prognostic scores, and the evaluation of eligibility for a transplant, based on performance, comorbidity, and other combined tools. Then, we will focus on the process of donor and conditioning regimens’ choice. The pre-transplant management of splenomegaly and constitutional symptoms, cytopenias, iron overload and transplant timing will be comprehensively discussed. The principal aim of this review is, therefore, to give a practical guidance for managing MF patients who are potential candidates for allo-HCT.