The consequences of delayed diagnosis and treatment in persons with multiple sclerosis given autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

OBJECTIVES

We have analyzed the association of delayed both diagnosis and treatment of persons with MS with the long-term results of patients given autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT).

METHODS

Patients with MS referred to the HSCT-Mexico program were included in the study; in 103, detailed pre- and post-transplant evolution could be recorded. Two groups of patients were analyzed according to the time of evolution between the onset of symptoms and the definite diagnosis of MS: more than 8 months (delayed diagnosis, DD), or less than 8 months (non-delayed diagnosis, NDD). The progression of MS was assessed by changes in the expanded disability status scale (EDSS).

RESULTS

The time elapsed between the onset of symptoms and the correct diagnosis was lower for the NDD group (1.55 vs. 35.87 months, p<0.05). Both groups of patients showed a similar EDSS score at diagnosis (1.5 vs. 1.5); however, the EDSS at the time of the transplant was higher in the DD group (4.5 vs. 3.0, p=0.3) and the response of the EDSS score to the transplant was significantly better for the NDD group, the last EDSS scores being 2.5 vs. 4.25 (p=0.03). Both groups of patients responded to aHSCT by diminishing the EDSS, but the response was significantly better in the NDD group.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate that both the pre-transplant progression of the disease and the response to aHSCT were significantly worse in the DD group. An early diagnosis and an early aHSCT intervention are critical for a good prognosis, in terms of lowering and stabilizing the motor disability in MS patients given autografts.

Selection of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma

Background

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an important treatment for T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma/leukemia (T-LBL). To compare the efficacy and influencing factors of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) with those of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) from different donors for the treatment of T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma/leukemia (T-LBL) and provide a basis for selection of appropriate transplant methods and donors.

Methods

To provide evidence of appropriate transplant methods for these patients, we retrospectively summarized the clinical characteristics of 75 T-LBL patients receiving HSCT at Henan Cancer Hospital between March 2012 and October 2021. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), non-relapse mortality (NRM), and related factors affecting efficacy were analyzed.

Results

The 3-year CIR (39.9% vs 31.1%, P=0.745), 3-year PFS (60.1% vs 49.6%, P=0.434), and 3-year OS (62.8% vs 53.0%, P=0.450) were not significantly different between the auto-HSCT and allo-HSCT groups. However, the 3-year NRM was significantly higher in the allo-HSCT group (0% vs 27.2%, P=0.033). Multivariate analysis showed that the first complete remission (CR1) after HSCT was an independent influencing factor of higher OS (HR=2.498, P=0.029) and PFS (HR=2.576, P=0.016). The absence of mediastinal invasion in patients receiving HSCT was an independent influencing factor of better PFS (HR=2.977, P=0.029) and lower CIR (HR=4.040, P=0.027). With respect to the impact of donor source, the NRM in the unrelated donor (URD) and haploid donor (HPD) groups was significantly higher than that in the auto-HSCT group (P=0.021 and P=0.003, respectively), while there was no significant difference between matched sibling donors (MSD) and auto-HSCT. Compared with the MSD-HSCT group, the auto-HSCT group showed an increasing trend in 3-year CIR (39.9 ± 11.1% vs 32.6 ± 11.2%, P=0.697) and a lower trend in 3-year OS (62.8 ± 11.4% vs 64.4 ± 12.2%, P=0.929).

Conclusions

HSCT is an effective consolidation treatment option for patients with T-LBL without mediastinal invasion and with CR1 before transplantation. For CR1 patients, auto-HSCT and MSD-HSCT are effective modalities for improving survival. In non-CR1 patients without an MSD, matched unrelated donors and haploidentical donor transplantations are the best treatment options to reduce relapse and improve prognosis.

Outcomes of allogeneic or autologous stem cell transplantation followed by maintenance chemotherapy in adult patient with B-ALL in CR1 with no detectable minimal residual disease

Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) as a treatment for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (B-ALL) has been rigorously debated in recent years. We retrospectively analysed the outcomes of 355 adult patients with B-ALL in first complete remission who had received auto-HSCT or allogeneic HSCT (allo-HSCT) in our centre. The treatment efficacy was evaluated from a model stratified on the risk classification and minimal residue disease (MRD) status after three chemotherapy cycles. Auto-HSCT demonstrated comparable 3-year overall survival (OS) (72.7% vs. 68.5%, p = 0.441) and leukaemia-free survival rates (62.8% vs. 56.1%, p = 0.383) compared to allo-HSCT for patients with negative MRD, while the advantage of lower non-relapse mortality (1.5% vs. 25.1%, p < 0.001) was offset by a higher cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) rates (35.7% vs. 18.9%, p = 0.018), especially in high-risk patients. For patients at high risk and with positive MRD, there was a lower trend of 3-year OS (50.0% vs. 66.0%, p = 0.078) and significantly higher CIR rates (71.4% vs. 39.1%, p = 0.018) in auto-HSCT. However, no significant interaction was observed in the tests. In conclusion, auto-HSCT appears to be an attractive treatment for patients with negative MRD after three chemotherapy cycles. For MRD-positive patients, allo-HSCT may be a more effective treatment.

Safety of Cryopreserved Stem Cell Infusion through a Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheter

The management of patients undergoing stem cell transplantation requires a multipurpose central venous catheter (CVC) to facilitate drug administration, parenteral nutrition, transfusion of blood products, and collection of blood samples. Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) appear to meet these requirements but are rarely used for stem cell infusion. We aimed to retrospectively assess the safety and feasibility of stem cell infusion through PICC and to evaluate its impact on transplantation kinetics. We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplantation in patients receiving cryopreserved autologous or allogeneic PBSC by PICCs and compared the results with patients receiving transplants through a conventionally inserted central venous catheter (CICC). Despite statistically significant differences in CD34⁺ dose, infusion rate, and total length of administration, the clinical outcomes of transplantation, exemplified by platelet and neutrophil engraftment, along with the length of hospitalization, were not affected by the prolonged infusion time and lower infusion velocity in the PICC group. Our study showed that the clinical outcomes of PBSC transplantation did not differ between the PICC and CICC groups, suggesting that both types of catheters can be implemented in a PBSC transplantation setting.

Efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy and autologous stem cell transplant in relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: A systematic review

Background

We aimed to compare the efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy with that of autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL).

Research design and methods

We searched eligible publications up to January 31st, 2022, in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Springer, and Scopus. A total of 16 publications with 3484 patients were independently evaluated and analyzed using STATA SE software.

Results

Patients who underwent CAR-T cell therapy showed a better overall response rate (ORR) and partial response (PR) than those treated with auto-HSCT (CAR-T vs. auto-HSCT, ORR: 80% vs. 73%, HR:0.90,95%CI:0.76-1.07,P = 0.001; PR: 20% vs. 14%, HR:0.65,95%CI:0.62-0.68,P = 0.034). No significant difference was observed in 6-month overall survival (OS) (CAR-T vs. auto-HSCT, six-month OS: 81% vs. 84%, HR:1.23,95%CI:0.63-2.38, P = 0.299), while auto-HSCT showed a favorable 1 and 2-year OS (CAR-T vs. auto-HSCT, one-year OS: 64% vs. 73%, HR:2.42,95%CI:2.27-2.79, P < 0.001; two-year OS: 54% vs. 68%, HR:1.81,95%CI:1.78-1.97, P < 0.001). Auto-HSCT also had advantages in progression-free survival (PFS) (CAR-T vs. auto-HSCT, six-month PFS: 53% vs. 76%, HR:2.81,95%CI:2.53-3.11,P < 0.001; one-year PFS: 46% vs. 61%, HR:1.84,95%CI:1.72-1.97,P < 0.001; two-year PFS: 42% vs. 54%, HR:1.62,95%CI:1.53-1.71, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis by age, prior lines of therapy, and ECOG scores was performed to compare the efficacy of both treatment modalities.

Conclusion

Although CAR-T cell therapy showed a beneficial ORR, auto-HSCT exhibited a better long-term treatment superiority in R/R DLBCL patients. Survival outcomes were consistent across different subgroups.