| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Blood, 26 February 2009, Vol. 113, No. 9, pp. 2096-2103. Prepublished online as a Blood First Edition Paper on January 6, 2009; DOI 10.1182/blood-2008-03-145862.
TRANSPLANTATION Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia: t(8;21) and inv(16) represent different clinical outcomes1 Department of Hematology, Japanese Red Cross Nagoya First Hospital, Nagoya; 2 Department of HSCT Data Management, Nagoya University School of Medicine, Nagoya; 3 Department of Hematology, Sapporo Hokuyu Hospital, Sapporo; 4 Department of Hematology, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama; 5 Department of Molecular Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka; 6 Stem Cell Transplantation Unit, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo; 7 Department of Hematology, Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo; 8 Department of Hematology, Asahikawa Red Cross Hospital, Asahikawa; 9 Department of Hematology, Shizuoka General Hospital, Shizuoka; 10 Hematology Department, Toyama Prefectural Hospital, Toyama; and 11 Department of Hematology, Tokyo Metropolitan Komagome Hospital, Tokyo, Japan We analyzed 338 adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with t(8;21) and inv(16) undergoing stem cell transplantation (SCT) who were registered in the Japan Society for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation database. At 3 years, overall survival (OS) of patients with t(8;21) and inv(16) was 50% and 72%, respectively (P = .002). Although no difference was observed when restricted to allogeneic SCT in first complete remission (CR; 84% and 74%), OS of patients with t(8;21) and inv(16) undergoing allogeneic SCT in second or third CR (45% and 86% at 3 years; P = .008) was different. OS was not different between patients in first CR who received allogeneic SCT and those who received autologous SCT for both t(8;21) AML (84% vs 77%; P = .49) and inv(16) AML (74% vs 59%; P = .86). Patients with inv(16) not in CR did better after allogeneic SCT than those with t(8;21) (70% and 18%; P = .03). Patients with t(8;21) and inv(16) should be managed differently as to the application of SCT. SCT in first CR is not necessarily recommended for inv(16). For t(8;21) patients in first CR, a prospective trial is needed to clarify the significance of autologous SCT and allogeneic SCT over chemotherapy.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Hematology Online ISSN: 1528-0020 | |||||||||