|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepublished online as a Blood First Edition Paper on April 30, 2002; DOI 10.1182/blood-2001-12-0304.
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS, INTERVENTIONS, AND THERAPEUTIC TRIALS
From the Department of Internal Medicine II, University
of Kiel, Germany; Department of Hematology/Oncology, Ankara University,
Turkey; Institute of Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology,
University of Leipzig, Germany; Department of Hematology, Ospedale San
Martino, Genova, Italy; Department of Medicine, Helsinki University
Central Hospital, Finland; Department of Bone Marrow Transplantation,
Hadassah University Hospital, Jerusalem, Israel; Nottingham City
Hospital, United Kingdom; Department of Hematology, Hammersmith
Hospital, London, United Kingdom; Bone Marrow Transplant Service, The
Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia; Blood and Marrow
Transplant Service, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia; Amgen,
Cambridge, United Kingdom; Kantonsspital, Basel, Switzerland; and
Department of Hematology, Hôpital St Louis; Department of
Hematology, Hôpital St Antoine; and Hôpital Necker, Service
d'Hematologie/Adulte; all of Paris, France. Participating institutions
and investigators are listed in the "Appendix" at the end of this
article.
Allogeneic mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells instead of
bone marrow are increasingly used to restore hematopoiesis after
myeloablative therapy. Data supporting this important change of
clinical practice are scarce. We therefore assigned patients with early
leukemias to peripheral blood or bone marrow transplantation; the
occurrence of acute and chronic graft versus host disease, survival,
transplantation-related mortality, and relapse rates were compared. A
total of 350 patients between 18 and 55 years of age with acute
leukemias in remission or chronic myelogenous leukemia in first
chronic phase were randomized to receive either filgrastim-mobilized
peripheral blood progenitor cells or bone marrow cells from
HLA-identical sibling donors after standard high-dose
chemoradiotherapy. Neutrophil and platelet recovery occurred
significantly faster after transplantation of peripheral blood
progenitor cells than after bone marrow transplantation. Acute graft
versus host disease of grades II-IV was significantly more frequent in
recipients of peripheral blood progenitor cells than in recipients of
marrow cells (52% vs 39%, odds ratio 1.74, 95% confidence
interval 1.12-2.69, P = .013). The cumulative incidence of chronic graft versus host disease was 67% with peripheral blood progenitor cells and 54% with bone marrow cells (hazard ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval 1.15-2.42, P = .0066). The
estimated overall probability of survival at 2 years was 65% with
either source of stem cells (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence
interval 0.79-1.67, P = .46). Disease-free survival,
transplantation-related mortality at day 100, and relapse rates did not
significantly differ between treatment arms. Peripheral blood is an
equivalent source of hematopoietic stem cells compared with bone marrow
if administered to patients with standard-risk leukemias. Long-term observation of patients with different diseases and stages of disease
is necessary to ultimately define the role of both sources of stem cells.
(Blood. 2002;100:761-767) Successful transplantation of recombinant human
granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rHuG-CSF)-mobilized allogeneic
peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPCs) was first reported in
emergencies such as failure of a previous marrow graft1 or
in patients with a donor unable to undergo general
anesthesia.2 Pilot studies from the United States and
Europe confirmed that allogeneic PBPC transplantation (PBPCT) is
feasible without causing devastating graft versus host (GVH) disease
elicited by the large numbers of T cells contained in PBPC harvest
products.3-5 These and other retrospective
analyses6-9 led to worldwide adoption of allogeneic PBPCT.
Data from the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation indicate that, by 1999, 45% of all allogeneic transplantations used
peripheral blood.10 A number of randomized studies have compared the risks and benefits of allogeneic PBPCT with those of bone
marrow transplantation (BMT).11-16 Significantly improved disease-free survival was shown in patients with advanced hematologic malignancies after PBPCT.11 Most published reports,
however, have been retrospective and have had small numbers of
patients, heterogeneous populations and disease characteristics, and
differences in the study designs, leaving important questions
concerning allogeneic PBPCT unanswered.
To understand some of the basic biologic properties of PBPC grafts and
to assess the effect on both acute and chronic GVH disease, we embarked
on a large, prospective, randomized trial comparing allogeneic PBPCT
with BMT in a homogeneous cohort of patients diagnosed with
standard-risk leukemia. We also aimed to determine risk factors for GVH
disease and survival and to relate observations to the numbers of
CD34+ hematopoietic stem cells and T cells transferred with
the grafts. An interim analysis including the first 70 patients
enrolled in this study has been published.17 We now report
the final results from the 350 recipients randomized. The study also
evaluated the safety and efficacy of the mobilization and collection of
PBPCs from healthy donors compared with donors who underwent bone
marrow harvesting.
Study design
Donors
Bone marrow was harvested by standard technique using general anesthesia with a target yield of at least 2 × 108 nucleated cells per kilogram of recipient weight and infused immediately (day 0). Donors randomized to PBPC collection were treated with filgrastim (Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA) at a dose of 10 µg/kg/d subcutaneously for 4 consecutive days starting 5 days before leukapheresis with a target CD34+ cell number of at least 4 × 106 CD34+ cells per kilogram of recipient weight. The unmanipulated leukapheresis product was stored overnight at 4°C and infused the next day (day 0). If the target CD34+ cell number had not been achieved, another dose of filgrastim was given and a second leukapheresis was performed. The combined collection product was then infused on day 0. Bone marrow and PBPC harvests were characterized by counting the numbers of nucleated cells, CD34+ hematopoietic stem cells, T cells, and natural killer (NK) cells using predefined methods.17 Patients Patients were eligible for enrollment into the study if they met the following inclusion criteria: age 16 (or the minimum age of consent) to 55 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2, and an HLA-identical sibling donor available. Eligible patients had a diagnosis of de novo acute myeloid leukemia or acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in first or second remission or in first incipient relapse, CML in first chronic phase or accelerated phase, or myelodysplastic syndrome excluding refractory anemia with excess of blasts in transformation. Acute leukemia in first incipient relapse was diagnosed if the blast count in marrow was between 5% and 30%. Patients were excluded if they had inadequate organ function, were human immunodeficiency virus-positive, had a history of splenectomy or splenic irradiation, or had previously received PBPCT or BMT.Conditioning therapy. Conditioning therapy could consist of total body irradiation (TBI) (single dose or fractionated) in combination with cyclophosphamide, melphalan, or etoposide at standard doses. Alternatively, busulfan (total dose 16 mg/kg recipient weight) followed by cyclophosphamide (total dose 200 mg/kg recipient body weight) or any other standard myeloablative therapy used at the individual transplantation center was allowed. GVH disease prophylaxis and treatment.
GVH disease prophylaxis consisted of cyclosporine and methotrexate.
Cyclosporine was started on day Supportive care. All patients received intravenous or subcutaneous filgrastim at a dose of 5 µg/kg/d from day +1 to day +28 or until neutrophil recovery occurred (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] > 1 × 109/L for 3 consecutive days), whichever occurred first. Other supportive measures (such as platelet and red blood cell transfusions, prophylaxis, and treatment of infections) were left to the discretion of the treating physician but standardized within centers. Study end points and definitions The primary end point of the study was the maximum grade of acute GVH disease observed in the recipient.18 Secondary end points analyzed for the recipients were the incidence of acute GVH disease grade II or above, time to acute GVH disease, time to an unsupported platelet count of 20 × 109/L and 50 × 109/L, time to ANC of 0.5 × 109/L and 1 × 109/L, incidence and severity of chronic GVH disease,19 leukemia-free survival, and overall survival.Statistical analysis The primary analysis of the maximum grade of acute GVH disease used the proportional odds model for ordered categorical data. The result was presented as the difference between the treatment groups (BMT, PBPCT) in the proportions of subjects experiencing acute GVH disease grade II or above, with its 95% confidence interval (CI), derived from the common odds ratio. The sample size20 was calculated to give a width of ± 10% in this CI on the assumption that the proportions of subjects experiencing each grade of acute GVH disease observed at the interim analysis (70 subjects randomized)17 would still be observed at the end of the study.Analysis of survival (time to death), time to acute GVH disease grade II or above, time to chronic GVH disease of any grade, and time to extensive chronic GVH disease used Kaplan-Meier plots, the log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards regression to calculate the hazard ratio. Time to hematopoietic recovery (neutrophils and platelets) was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier plots, the generalized Wilcoxon test for censored survival data, and Cox proportional hazards regression to calculate the hazard ratio. Additional analyses assessed the effect of subject baseline covariates
(diagnosis, donor-recipient ABO compatibility, donor-recipient cytomegalovirus status, recipient age, donor-recipient sex mismatch, female to male transplantation, and conditioning regimen of TBI plus
chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone) and treatment covariates (source of
cells [bone marrow or PBPCs] and numbers of CD34+ cells,
NK cells, and T cells) on the outcome variables and on the difference
between the treatment groups. These covariate analyses used logistic
regression for the incidence of acute GVH disease grade II or above and
the incidence of chronic GVH disease. For time to death, Cox
proportional hazards regression was used for the covariate analyses.
The correlation of CD34 cell number and survival was investigated for
the PBPC recipients by dichotomizing the CD34 cell number using values
of 1.0 × 106/kg, 2.0 × 106/kg,
3.0 × 106/kg, 4.0 × 106/kg,
5.0 × 106/kg, 6.0 × 106/kg, and
5.8 × 106/kg (the median value) and assessing the
significance and magnitude of the effect of the CD34 explanatory
variable in a Cox regression model. All statistical tests were 2-sided
and were carried out at the
A total of 350 patients were randomized to BMT (176 patients) or PBPCT (174 patients). Twenty-one donor-recipient pairs were withdrawn before harvest. The pretransplantation withdrawals were due to relapse of the recipient (7 patients), withdrawal of consent (5 patient-donor pairs), ineligibility of donor or recipient (4 patient-donor pairs), Aspergillus sinusitis, Klinefelter syndrome (1 patient and 1 donor, respectively), recipient death (2 patients), and failure to mobilize (1 donor), with even distribution of the withdrawals between treatment groups. Baseline characteristics of the 329 patients who received a transplant
are summarized in Table 1. Ninety-eight
percent of the patients were classified as standard-risk patients; only
2% of the patients who were diagnosed with CML in accelerated phase were considered to be poor-risk.
Collection and characteristics of hematopoietic stem cell products Bone marrow was harvested from 166 donors, and PBPCs were collected from 163 donors. One serious adverse event was reported in a PBPC donor who neglected to take prescribed calcium supplements before leukapheresis and developed severe hypocalcemia and tetany. Overall, 57% of bone marrow donors and 65% of PBPC donors experienced at least 1 adverse event. Procedure-related adverse events with at least 5% incidence are shown in Table 2. In PBPC donors the events were primarily related to the administration of filgrastim (skeletal and back pain); in the bone marrow donors the events were related to the harvest procedure (access pain and anemia). Although every attempt was made to use a peripheral access, 11 PBPC donors (7%) required a central venous access. The goal of leukapheresis was to harvest a minimum of 4 × 106 CD34+ cells per kilogram of recipient weight: 93 PBPC donors (57%) underwent 1, 62 (38%) underwent 2, and 8 (5%) underwent 3 leukaphereses to reach this target. Thirty-one PBPC donors (19%) did not reach the target; these transplantations went ahead with a median of 3.2 × 106 CD34+ cells per kilogram of body weight (range 1.5 × 106 to 3.9 × 106). The harvests from 44 bone marrow donors (27%) did not contain the target of 2 × 108 nucleated cells per kilogram of recipient weight; however, the transplantations went ahead. PBPC harvests contained more than twice the number of CD34+ cells and approximately 8 times more T cells and NK cells than bone marrow harvests (Table 3).
Conditioning The conditioning regimens used before BMT or PBPCT and summarized in Table 4 indicate little difference between the treatment groups.
Hematopoietic recovery Three patients randomized to receive bone marrow also received PBPCs 6, 20, and 40 days after BMT because the treating physician was concerned with the low CD34+ counts in the bone marrow harvest and/or slow hematopoietic recovery. These patients were analyzed with their original treatment group.The median time to platelet counts at least 20 × 109/L
and at least 50 × 109/L was 20 days (95% CI 19-22 days)
and 26 days (95% CI 24-28 days), respectively, for the BMT group and
15 days (95% CI 14-16 days) and 20 days (95% CI 17-22 days),
respectively, for the PBPCT group (P < .0001). This
difference translated into a median of 10 days (range 2 to 71) of
platelet transfusions in the BMT group and a median of 8 days (range 1 to 68) of platelet transfusions in the PBPCT group
(P = .0029). The median time to ANC at least
0.5 × 109/L and at least 1.0 × 109/L in
the patients undergoing transplantation with bone marrow was 15 days
(95% CI 15-15 days) and 16 days (95% CI 16-16 days), respectively.
The median times to ANC at least 0.5 × 109/L and at
least 1.0 × 109/L were significantly shorter in the
PBPCT group: 12 days (95% CI 12-13 days) and 14 days (95% CI 13-15 days), respectively, (P < .0001) (Figure
1).
Acute GVH disease Similar proportions of patients (26% vs 25% receiving BMT or PBPCT, respectively) developed no signs of acute GVH disease (Figure 2). Significantly more patients, however, in the PBPCT group compared with the BMT group had acute GVH disease grade II or above (52% vs 39%, odds ratio 1.74, 95% CI 1.12-2.69, P = .013) and acute GVH disease grades III and IV (28% vs 16%, odds ratio 2.02, 95% CI 1.19-3.49, P = .0088), respectively. The cumulative incidence of acute GVH disease grade II or above in the 2 treatment groups is shown in Figure 3. Target organs primarily involved with acute GVH disease were skin (68%), gastrointestinal tract (32%), and liver (25%), with no significant differences between the treatment groups.
None of the patient characteristics had a significant influence on the occurrence of acute GVH disease grade II or above. After restricting the analysis to the 256 patients who had CD34+ cell, NK cell, and T-cell numbers measured in the collection product, an increase in the risk of developing acute GVH disease was associated with higher T-cell numbers (odds ratio for unit increase 1.003, 95% CI 1.001-1.004, P = .0001) and lower numbers of NK cells (odds ratio for unit increase 0.989, 95% CI 0.981-0.996, P = .0005). In addition, an effect of the source of the transplanted cells was found that was independent of the effects of T-cell and NK cell numbers. After adjusting for T-cell and NK cell numbers, the odds ratio between PBPCT and BMT was 1.971 (95% CI 1.040-3.771, P = .038). Chronic GVH disease Patients assigned to PBPCT developed significantly more chronic GVH disease than patients undergoing transplantation with bone marrow cells (hazard ratio 1.67, 95% CI 1.15-2.42, P = .0066) (Figure 4). There was also more extensive chronic GVH disease in patients having received PBPCs compared with bone marrow cells (hazard ratio 2.60, 95% CI 1.48-4.58, P = .0009). Taking into account all 280 patients evaluable for chronic GVH disease, male patients undergoing transplantation from a female donor and patients with ALL had a significantly greater risk of developing chronic GVH disease. Including only those patients (n = 222) with valid CD34+ and T-cell counts, the risk of developing chronic GVH disease was greater in male patients with female donors; patients with a diagnosis of ALL; and patients undergoing transplantation with grafts containing high T-cell numbers, low CD34+ counts, and a history of acute GVH disease grade II or above (Table 5).
Transplantation-related mortality, relapse, and survival With a median follow-up of 2 years (range 3 to 43 months), death has been reported for 58 patients in the PBPCT group and 53 patients in the BMT group (Table 6). No significant differences for transplant-related mortality, relapse rate, and overall survival were found (Figure 5).
We analyzed the prognostic effect of patient and treatment covariates on survival using Cox regression models. Higher recipient age (hazard ratio for unit increase 1.029, 95% CI 1.007-1.050, P = .0082), conditioning with busulfan and cyclophosphamide (hazard ratio 1.536, 95% CI 1.029-2.294, P = .039), and a diagnosis of ALL (hazard ratio 2.832, 95% CI 1.825-4.395, P = .0001) were negatively correlated with survival. After adjusting for those 3 baseline variables, higher CD34+ cell numbers had a borderline positive correlation with survival (hazard ratio for unit increase in log CD34+ number 0.852, 95% CI 0.729-0.996, P = .063), while the development of acute GVH disease grade II or above was negatively correlated (hazard ratio 1.812, 95% CI 1.239-2.649, P = .0022). The relationship between survival and log CD34+ cell number was continuous, with no threshold effect. The correlation of survival with log CD34+ number was significant when we analyzed the BMT group only (hazard ratio for unit increase 0.799, 95% CI 0.671-0.951, P = .022) but appeared nonexistent in the PBPCT group (hazard ratio for unit increase 1.037, 95% CI 0.621-1.732, P = .89), although no formal evidence of a treatment by log CD34+ yield interaction (P = .33) was seen. These correlations with survival will need reconsideration when follow-up is longer and more events have occurred.
In a large and homogeneous group of patients with standard-risk leukemias and an HLA-identical donor, we demonstrated that unmanipulated PBPCs cause significantly more severe acute and chronic GVH disease than bone marrow cells. We also correlated this finding with the greater number of T cells contained in the PBPC grafts. A statistically significant increase in acute GVH disease has not been reported from any of the 6 other randomized trials published so far, although 3 of them showed a respective trend.11-13 Among others, the varying doses of rHuG-CSF administered to the donors that influence the composition of the graft or the omission of methotrexate on day 11 after transplantation21 could explain this finding. We decided not to give methotrexate on day 11 because when the study was planned it was feared that methotrexate would compromise engraftment of PBPCs. We believe that the lack of statistical power of the smaller studies and differences in the patient characteristics between larger trials most likely account for the observed differences. The finding that PBPCs also cause more chronic GVH disease is in line with the French study;14 other randomized trials found a trend in that direction. The increased risk of chronic GVH disease in our study is summarized in a hazard ratio of 1.003. In practical terms, this means that an increase in T cell numbers of 33 × 106/kg would be associated with an increase of 10% in the odds of chronic GVH disease. The large randomized trials had a substantial number of patients with advanced disease where the high risk of GVH disease might have been blurred by other competing risks. The observation that patients undergoing transplantation with grafts containing low numbers of CD34+ cells or suffering from ALL is correlated with more chronic GVH disease is unique and will need confirmation by other studies. A history of acute GVH disease and transplantation to a male recipient from a female donor have repeatedly been reported as risk factors for GVH disease.23,24 In all studies, reported recovery of neutrophil and platelet
counts occurred significantly faster after PBPCT than after BMT. The
varying differences in the numbers of days until neutrophil and
platelet recovery between the treatment groups of the randomized studies may be a consequence of patient selection and differences in
the study design. Of note, our study was the only one that included the
administration of rHuG-CSF to both recipients of PBPCs and bone marrow
cells after transplantation. This recommendation was probably
responsible for the shorter neutrophil recovery time observed in
recipients of blood25,26 and, in particular, of bone marrow
cells compared with the recovery reported in the other randomized
studies. A number of experimental findings such as polarization of
donor T cells toward the production of type 2 cytokines,27
suppression of alloantigen-induced T-cell proliferation by
CD14+ cells,28 or the enrichment of
CD4 We did not observe any differences in the numbers of relapses occurring after PBPCT or BMT, although experimental30 and clinical findings13,15 have suggested a stronger graft versus leukemia effect after PBPCT than after BMT. Our study was conducted with standard-risk patients, 43% of them being CML patients in first chronic phase. Therefore, much longer follow-up will be necessary before drawing definite conclusions concerning the antileukemic potential of PBPCs compared with bone marrow cells. We did not find differences between treatment arms in early transplantation-related mortality. Such differences have been reported6,15 but were largely restricted to patients with advanced hematologic cancers, a group not included in our study. Overall survival and leukemia-free survival were nearly identical for patients grafted with PBPCs or bone marrow. This finding, although in line with other studies that included patients with standard-risk disease, was surprising because the higher incidence of acute and chronic GVH disease raised concerns that patients grafted with PBPCs might also show inferior survival. Although we do not have a definite explanation for our finding, it might be possible that patients developed more GVH disease after PBPCT but that this did not impair survival because GVH disease could be treated successfully in most cases. To confirm this hypothesis, further follow-up of study patients is ongoing. Older age31 and the combination of busulfan and cyclophosphamide instead of a TBI-containing regimen have previously been described to negatively influence survival after allogeneic marrow transplantation.22,32 Most patients with ALL who received transplants in first remission had a very high risk of relapse after allogeneic BMT (20% of our patients had Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemia), and it is not completely unexpected that these patients did worse than the patients with myeloid leukemias in our study. Data from Morariu-Zamfir et al33 and from the British
randomized study34 showed that patients grafted with large
CD34+ cell numbers have a significantly better survival
than patients grafted with small numbers of CD34+ cells. We
confirm We conclude that PBPCT results in faster engraftment, gives rise to more acute and chronic GVH disease, and leads to identical survival in patients with standard-risk leukemia when compared with BMT. PBPCs mobilized by rHuG-CSF may be the preferred source of hematopoietic stem cells in the future because large numbers of CD34+ cells can be obtained and extensive manipulation of the graft is possible without losing too many hematopoietic cells. Attempts to manipulate the graft in order to modulate GVH reactions and the graft versus leukemia effect continue. Such tailoring of the graft to the individual needs of the patient must be the ultimate goal.
We thank Christel Diener for outstanding secretarial help and Elaine Brush for excellent data management.
Submitted December 21, 2001; accepted March 13, 2002.
Prepublished online as Blood First Edition Paper, April 30, 2002; DOI 10.1182/blood-2001-12-0304.
The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. Therefore, and solely to indicate this fact, this article is hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. section 1734.
Reprints: Norbert Schmitz, Dept of Hematology, Allgemeines Krankenhaus St Georg Hamburg, Lohmühlenstr 5, D-20099 Hamburg, Germany; e-mail: norbert.schmitz{at}ak-stgeorg.lbk-hh.de.
1.
Dreger P, Suttorp M, Haferlach T, Loeffler H, Schroyens W, Schmitz N.
Allogeneic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor-mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells for treatment of engraftment failure after bone marrow transplantation [letter].
Blood.
1993;81:1404-1407 2. Russell NH, Hunter A, Rogers S, Hanley J, Anderson D. Peripheral blood stem cells as an alternative to marrow for allogeneic transplantation [letter]. Lancet. 1993;341:1482[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
3.
Bensinger WI, Weaver CH, Appelbaum FR, et al.
Transplantation of allogeneic peripheral blood stem cells mobilized by recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor.
Blood.
1995;85:1655-1658
4.
Koerbling M, Przepiorka D, Huh Y, et al.
Allogeneic blood stem cell transplantation for refractory leukemia and lymphoma: potential advantage of blood over marrow allografts.
Blood.
1995;85:1659-1665
5.
Schmitz N, Dreger P, Suttorp M, et al.
Primary transplantation of allogeneic peripheral blood progenitor cells mobilized by filgrastim (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor).
Blood.
1995;85:1666-1672
6.
Champlin RE, Schmitz N, Horowitz MM, et al.
Blood stem cells compared with bone marrow as a source of hematopoietic cells for allogeneic transplantation.
Blood.
2000;95:3702-3709 7. Miflin G, Russell NH, Hutchinson RM, et al. Allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for haematological malignancies: an analysis of kinetics of engraftment and GVHD risk. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1997;19:9-13[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 8. Schmitz N, Bacigalupo A, Labopin M, et al. Transplantation of peripheral blood progenitor cells from HLA-identical sibling donors. Br J Haematol. 1996;5:715-723. 9. Urbano-Ispizua A, Solano C, Brunet S, et al. Allogeneic peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation: analysis of short-term engraftment and acute GVHD incidence in 33 cases. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1996;18:35-40[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 10. Gratwohl A, Passweg J, Baldomero H, Urbano-Ispizua A. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation activity in Europe 1999. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2001;27:899-916[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
11.
Bensinger WI, Martin PJ, Storer B, et al.
Transplantation of bone marrow as compared with peripheral blood cells from HLA-identical relatives in patients with hematologic cancers.
N Engl J Med.
2001;344:175-181 12. Heldal D, Tjonnfjord G, Brinch L, et al. A randomised study of allogeneic transplantation with stem cells from blood or bone marrow. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2000;25:1129-1136[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 13. Powles R, Mehta J, Kulkarni S, et al. Allogeneic blood and bone marrow stem-cell transplantation in haematological malignant diseases: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2000;355:1231-1237[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
14.
Blaise D, Kuentz M, Fortainer C, et al.
Randomized trial of bone marrow versus lenograstim-primed blood cell allogeneic transplantation in patients with early-stage leukemia: a report from the Société Francaise de Greffe de Moelle.
J Clin Oncol.
2000;18:537-546 15. Simpson DR, Couban ST, Bredeson CH, et al. Canadian randomized study comparing peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM) in patients undergoing matched sibling transplants for myeloid malignancies [abstract]. Blood. 2000;96(suppl, pt 1):481a. 16. Vigorito AC, Azevedo WM, Marques JFC, et al. A randomised, prospective comparison of allogeneic bone marrow and peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation in the treatment of haematological malignancies. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1998;22:1145-1151[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 17. Schmitz N, Bacigalupo A, Hasenclever D, et al. Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation vs filgrastim-mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation in patients with early leukemia: first results of a randomised multicentre trial of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1998;21:995-1003[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 18. Glucksberg H, Storb R, Fefer A, et al. Clinical manifestations of graft-versus-host disease in human recipients of marrow from HLA-matched sibling donors. Transplantation. 1974;18:295-304[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 19. Shulman HM, Sullivan KM, Weiden PL, et al. Chronic graft-versus-host syndrome in man. A long term clinicopathologic study of 20 Seattle patients. Am J Med. 1980;69:204-217[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 20. Whitehead J. Sample size calculation for ordered categorical data. Stat Med. 1993;12:2257-2271[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
21.
Nash RA, Pepe MS, Storb R, et al.
Acute graft-versus-host disease: analysis of risk factors after allogeneic marrow transplantation and prophylaxis with cyclosporine and methotrexate.
Blood.
1992;80:1838-1845
22.
Blaise D, Maraninchi D, Michallet M, et al.
Long-term follow-up of a randomized trial comparing the combination of cyclophosphamide with total body irradiation or busulfan as conditioning regimen for patients receiving HLA-identical marrow grafts for acute myeloblastic leukemia in first complete remission [letter].
Blood.
2001;97:3669-3671
23.
Atkinson K, Horowitz MM, Gale RP, et al.
Risk factors for chronic graft-versus-host disease after HLA-identical sibling bone marrow transplantation.
Blood.
1990;75:2459-2464 24. Carlens S, Ringdén O, Remberger M, et al. Risk factors for chronic graft-versus-host disease after bone marrow transplantation: a retrospective single centre analysis. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1998;22:755-761[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
25.
Bishop MR, Tarantolo SR, Geller RB, et al.
A randomized, double-blind trial of filgrastim (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) versus placebo following allogeneic blood stem cell transplantation.
Blood.
2000;96:80-85
26.
Przepiorka D, Smith TL, Folloder J, et al.
Controlled trial of filgrastim for acceleration of neutrophil recovery after allogeneic blood stem cell transplantation from human leukocyte antigen-matched related donors.
Blood.
2001;97:3405-3410
27.
Pan L, Delmonte J, Jalonen CK, et al.
Pretreatment of donor mice with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor polarizes donor T lymphocytes toward type-2 cytokine production and reduces severity of experimental graft-versus-host disease.
Blood.
1995;86:4422-4429
28.
Mielcarek M, Martin PJ, Torok-Storb B.
Suppression of alloantigen-induced T-cell proliferation by CD14+ cells derived from granulocyte colony-stimulating factor-mobilized peripheral blood mononuclear cells.
Blood.
1997;89:1629-1634
29.
Kusnierz-Glaz CR, Still BJ, Amano M, et al.
Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor-induced comobilization of CD4- CD8- T cells and hematopoietic progenitor cells (CD34+) in the blood of normal donors.
Blood.
1997;89:2586-2595
30.
Glass B, Uharek L, Zeis M, et al.
Allogeneic peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation in a murine model: evidence for an improved graft-versus-leukemia effect.
Blood.
1997;90:1694-1700 31. Transplant or chemotherapy in acute myelogenous leukaemia. International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry. Lancet. 1989;1:1119-1122[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
32.
Ringdén O, Remberger M, Ruutu T, et al.
Increased risk of chronic graft-versus-host disease, obstructive bronchiolitis, and alopecia with busulfan versus total body irradiation: long-term results of a randomized trial in allogeneic marrow recipients with leukemia.
Blood.
1999;93:2196-2201 33. Morariu-Zamfir R, Rocha V, Devergie A, et al. Influence of CD34+ marrow cell dose on outcome of HLA-identical sibling allogeneic bone marrow transplants in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2001;27:575-580[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 34. Singhal S, Powles R, Treleaven J, et al. A low CD34+ cell dose results in higher mortality and poorer survival after blood or marrow stem cell transplantation from HLA-identical siblings: should 2 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg be considered the minimum threshold? Bone Marrow Transplant. 2000;26:489-496[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
This study was conducted at the following inst | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Top
Abstract
Introduction
1 and continued until day +180 unless
active GVH disease was present. In this case cyclosporine was continued
as clinically indicated. Cyclosporine was started intravenously and
continued orally as soon as possible with doses following local
practice but monitored by measurement of cyclosporine blood levels.
Methotrexate was administered on day +1 (15 mg/m2), day +3,
and day +6 (10 mg/m2). No methotrexate was given on
day +11.
= 0.05 level. No adjustments were
made for multiple testing.
/CD8
in a much larger cohort of patients