|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS, INTERVENTIONS, AND THERAPEUTIC TRIALS
From the Center for Hematologic Oncology and Department
of Biostatistics, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Departments of Medicine
and Radiation Therapy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical
School, Boston, MA.
Previous trials of allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) in
patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have demonstrated high response
rates but also high transplantation-related mortality (TRM) and high
relapse rates. Exploitation of this strategy remains of interest
because donor lymphocyte infusions (DLIs) can induce a potent
graft-versus-myeloma (GVM) effect. CD6 T-cell-depleted allogeneic BMT
was combined with prophylactic CD4+ DLI administered 6 to 9 months after BMT in an effort to reduce TRM and to induce a GVM
response after BMT. Twenty-four patients with matched sibling donors
and chemotherapy-sensitive disease underwent BMT. CD6 T-cell depletion
of donor bone marrow was the sole method of graft-versus-host disease
(GVHD) prophylaxis. GVHD after BMT was minimal, 1 (4%) grade III and 4 (17%) grade II GVHD. Fourteen patients received DLI, 3 in complete
response and 11 with persistent disease after BMT. Significant GVM
responses were noted after DLI in 10 patients with persistent disease,
resulting in 6 complete responses and 4 partial responses. After DLI,
50% of patients developed acute ( Previous studies of allogeneic bone marrow
transplantation (BMT) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have
reported complete response (CR) rates of 36% to 58% after BMT, but
only 10% to 20% of patients achieve long-term remission. The European
Bone Marrow Transplant Registry (EBMTR) reports a 44% CR rate, but an
overall survival (OS) of only 32% for patients 4 years after
transplantation.1 Bensinger et al2 reported
36% CRs in patients with chemotherapy-refractory MM, but OS was 20%,
and progression-free survival (PFS) was only 16% at 5 years. High
treatment-related mortality (TRM), up to 50% in some studies,
contributes to the poor survival. This high TRM is most commonly
related to complications of acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and
infections after BMT. This high TRM and high relapse rates after
allogeneic BMT have limited the effectiveness of this approach in
patients with MM. Although T-cell depletion of donor bone marrow (BM)
has been shown to reduce the incidence of acute GVHD as well as other
transplantation-related complications in MM, T-cell depletion is
associated with abrogation of the graft-versus-leukemia (GVL) effect
after transplantation.3,4 Therefore, measures to minimize
TRM while maintaining GVL are urgently needed.
Donor lymphocyte infusions (DLI) have emerged as an effective method to
treat patients who have relapsed after allogeneic BMT. DLI is effective
in inducing a GVL response in patients with chronic myelogenous
leukemia (CML), and approximately 70% of patients with chronic phase
CML who receive DLI will achieve a cytogenetic CR.5,6
Several studies have also demonstrated significant responses, including
CRs, in patients with MM treated with DLI for posttransplant
relapse.5,7-9 Overall, there appears to be a 40% to 60%
response rate in patients with relapsed MM treated with
DLI.10 In some MM patients, remissions appear to be
durable and sustained for up to 6 years after DLI. These clinical
responses confirm the existence of an allogeneic graft-versus-myeloma
(GVM) effect mediated by DLI. In CML, treatment with DLI early in
relapse (ie, cytogenetic relapse) is associated with an increased
response rate and with a reduced incidence of complications compared
with treatment of patients in more advanced stages of
relapse.11 However, the role and optimal timing of DLI
after BMT in patients with MM, who are at high risk for relapse, remain
to be defined.
In the present study, we explored the use of CD6 T-cell depletion at
the time of allografting in MM to reduce the high incidence of
treatment-related complications. In an attempt to induce a GVM effect,
which may be compromised by the T-cell depletion procedure, prophylactic CD4+ DLI was administered 6 to 9 months after
transplantation. Although patients who received T-depleted BMT followed
by CD4+ DLI had improved current progression-free survival
(PFS) when compared with a similar cohort of patients previously
treated with BMT alone, transplantation-related toxicities precluded
many patients from receiving DLI. Transplantation preparative regimens that establish donor chimerism without excessive toxicity are therefore
necessary to allow for the majority of patients to receive DLI and to
derive the benefit of the GVM effect.
Patients included in this analysis included 24 adults with MM
who underwent allogeneic BMT from HLA-identical sibling donors at our
institution between January 1, 1996, and September 1, 1999, with
follow-up of at least 6 months after BMT. All patients received CD6
T-cell-depleted BMT and were eligible to receive prophylactic CD4+ DLI 6 to 9 months after BMT. The median follow-up
among those alive (n = 12) is 2.3 years (range, 1.2 to 3.6). Patients
younger than 60 years with a histocompatible sibling donor were
eligible to participate. All patients had evidence of
chemotherapy-responsive disease prior to BMT that allowed them to
achieve less than 40% plasma cells in the BM at the time of
transplantation. Treatment protocols were approved by the Institutional
Review Board of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Written informed
consent was obtained in all cases.
Treatment protocol
Donor BM was harvested on the last day of ablative therapy, and T-cell
depletion was performed by using anti-CD6 monoclonal antibody and
complement lysis, as previously described.13,14 CD6
depletion of donor BM was the sole method of GVHD prophylaxis, and no
other immune-suppressive medications were administered after BMT.
Marrow was infused on the same day it was harvested (day 0). All
patients received granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) at 5 µg/kg/d beginning at day +1 and continuing until the absolute
neutrophil count exceeded 1 × 103 cells/µL.
All patients were treated in high-efficiency particular air-filtered
rooms by using standard reverse isolation procedures. Oral prophylactic
antibiotics were administered to all patients. If fever developed, oral
antibiotics were discontinued and intravenous broad-spectrum
antibiotics were instituted. All blood components were leukoreduced
before storage and irradiated (2500 Gy) to prevent transfusion-associated GVHD.
CD4+ donor lymphocyte infusion
Definitions of response Responses were classified by using standard criteria. Immunoelectrophoresis and immunofixation were used to evaluate for the presence of serum and/or urine monoclonal immunoglobulin. Marrow examination included staining to demonstrate immunoglobulin light chain restriction. A CR was defined by the presence of less than 5% polyclonal plasma cells in the BM and the absence of a monoclonal protein in serum or urine by immunofixation. A partial response (PR) was the presence of a decrease of 50% or more in the serum and/or urine monoclonal protein and less than 10% monoclonal plasma cells on BM biopsy. Stable disease was a less than 50% reduction in paraprotein. Progressive disease was defined as the reappearance of serum and/or urine monoclonal protein for patients in CR, or more than 25% increase in serum and/or urine monoclonal protein from the lowest value observed for patients in PR.Statistical analysis Patient characteristics are summarized using proportions and medians. OS and PFS curves were constructed using the method of Kaplan and Meier.12 Current PFS is the time from BMT to the first relapse, progression, or death among those patients who did not receive DLI and is the time from BMT to the first relapse, progression, or death after DLI among those patients who received DLI.13 Cox proportional hazards model was used in multivariate modeling to determine predictors of OS and PFS for all patients. Comparisons between the patients receiving CD6-depleted BMT and DLI and patients receiving CD6-depleted BMT alone were done using the Fisher exact test, Wilcoxon test, and the log rank test where appropriate.14 A landmark analysis was performed to compare OS and PFS in the patients receiving CD6-depleted BMT plus DLI compared with patients receiving CD6-depleted BMT alone. In this analysis patients who received DLI after BMT were compared with a cohort of patients treated with CD6-depleted BMT alone who otherwise would have been candidates to receive DLI. This cohort was defined as those who were alive at the median time of DLI (6.4 months) and had not developed GVHD after BMT. This analysis was done because those groups provide a better comparison to assess the effect of DLI.
Patients treated A total of 24 patients underwent allogeneic BMT (Table 1). The median age of all patients was 46 years (range, 36-54). There were 12 men and 12 women. The majority (54%) of patients had Durie-Salmon Stage III disease at diagnosis. Sixty-six percent of patients had immunoglobulin (Ig) G myeloma, 17% IgA, and 17% light chain only. All patients had evidence of chemotherapy-sensitive disease at the time of transplantation. The median time from diagnosis to BMT was 10 months. Patients had received a median of 3 regimens (range, 1-7) before BMT. Four (17%) patients were in CR at the time of BMT. Twenty patients had evidence of persistent disease at the time of BMT. Ablative therapy included cyclophosphamide and TBI in 21 patients (88%); cyclophosphamide and busulfan were used in 3 patients (12%).
Engraftment All patients engrafted after infusion of CD6 T-cell-depleted BM. With the use of G-CSF, the median time to reach an absolute neutrophil count more than 500/µL was 12 days (range, 10-17) and platelets more than 20 000/µL was 19 days (range, 16-28). The median duration of hospitalization was 21 days (range, 18-33). The median number of nucleated cells infused was 3.98 × 107 cells/kg (range, 1.51-8.89). The median number of CD3+ cells/kg infused was 4.0 × 105 cells/kg (range, 0.80-24.71). The median number of CD34+ cells infused was 1.4 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg (range, 0.49-3.89).Response to BMT Of the 4 patients who were in CR at the time of BMT, 2 patients remained in CR at 6 months after BMT, 1 patient developed progressive disease, and 1 patient died early after BMT of a treatment-related complication (Table 2). Twenty patients had evidence of persistent disease at the time of BMT. Six months after BMT, 1 of these patients achieved a CR, 8 patients a PR, and 10 evaluable patients (50%) had either stable or progressive disease. A single patient died less than 100 days after BMT.
Response to CD4+ DLI Patients were eligible to receive CD4+ DLI 6 to 9 months after BMT as prophylaxis if they had no evidence of GVHD and were not receiving immune-suppressive medications. Fourteen of 24 (58%) patients received DLI at 6 to 9 months after DLI. Three patients were in CR and 11 patients had persistent disease at the time of DLI. CD8 depletion of the DLI product resulted in a 98.8% (range, 94%-100%) depletion of CD8+ cells. Two of 14 patients received DLI that contained no detectable CD8+ cells by flow cytometry. Twelve patients received DLI that contained a median of 1.7 × 105 CD8+ cells/kg (range, 1.2-2.3). Of the 11 patients with persistent disease receiving DLI, 6 patients developed a CR and 4 patients a PR after DLI. The remaining patient has stable disease 6 months after DLI with a stable monoclonal protein The median time to best response was 6.4 months (range, 2-28) after DLI (Figure 1). The median time to CR after DLI was 11.7 months.
Overall, 5 (36%) patients remain in a CR after DLI with a median follow-up of 28 months (range, 15-43) after DLI. Of the 3 patients who received DLI while in CR, 1 patient has relapsed. One patient who achieved a CR after DLI died of a myocardial infarction 4 years after DLI while in remission. Of the 11 patients with persistent disease at the time of BMT, 1 patient who obtained a CR after DLI relapsed 12 months after DLI, and 2 patients who achieved a PR after DLI developed progressive disease 6 and 12 months after DLI. Ten (42%) patients were not able to receive DLI at 6 to 9 months after DLI. Of these 10 patients, 3 patients had developed either complications of GVHD or had ongoing GVHD that precluded DLI. Three patients developed other transplantation-related complications after BMT including veno-occlusive disease, interstitial pneumonitis, and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) posttransplant lymphoma that prevented planned CD4+ DLI. Two patients had early relapse and died of progressive disease. One patient had an active infection that prevented DLI, and a single patient refused. Treatment-related toxicity associated with BMT and DLI Five of 24 (21%) patients developed evidence of acute grade II-IV GVHD after T-cell-depleted BMT with 4 patients developing grade II GVHD and 1 (4%) patient with grade III GVHD. Five (21%) patients died of transplantation-related complications, including complications related to GVHD in 2 cases and veno-occlusive disease, EBV non-Hodgkin lymphoma-lymphoproliferative disease, and noninfectious interstitial pneumonitis in the remaining 3 cases.The development of GVHD was the most significant complication of DLI. Overall 7 of 14 (50%) patients receiving DLI developed grade II-IV acute GVHD or extensive chronic GVHD. One patient died of complications of GVHD following DLI. With long-term follow-up, 3 patients who received DLI remain in CR without evidence of active GVHD. Five patients developed evidence of extensive chronic GVHD. No patients developed evidence of pancytopenia following DLI. The development of GVHD in 5 patients after BMT was not associated with significant disease responses. Two of these 5 patients subsequently developed evidence of progressive disease despite the presence of GVHD. Significant acute or chronic GVHD occurred in 7 patients (50%) after DLI. Six of 7 patients demonstrated initial evidence of a GVM response at the time of the development of GVHD and before the initiation of steroid therapy for GHVD. The development of GVHD after DLI was not protective of relapse, however, because 2 patients with GVHD subsequently developed evidence of progressive disease. Six patients had evidence of a GVM response in the absence of GVHD with 3 patients achieving CR. One patient with stable disease at 6 months after DLI has no evidence of GVHD. Overall response to BMT and DLI With a median follow-up of 2.3 years among those patients alive, the estimated 1- and 2-year OS for all 24 patients enrolled in the study are 71% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53%-89%) and 55% (95% CI, 34%-76%), respectively. The estimated 1- and 2-year PFS is 54% (95% CI, 34%-74%) and 30% (95% CI, 10%-50%), respectively. The 100-day mortality was 4%.Comparison with the outcome of patients treated with T-cell-depleted BMT alone A comparison was performed between patients treated with CD6-depleted BMT and DLI versus a cohort of 38 patients previously treated with CD6-depleted BMT alone at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. This control population was similar to the current treatment group in terms of demographic characteristics (Table 1). The conditioning regimens and GVHD prophylaxis with CD6 T-cell depletion were identical. The estimated 2-year OS in the current study of CD6-depleted BMT and DLI of 57% compares with the 2-year OS of 49% (95% CI, 33%-65%) in the group who received CD6-depleted BMT alone (P = .88) (Figure 2). The estimated 2-year current PFS in the current study of CD6-depleted BMT plus DLI is 42% (95% CI, 20%-64%) as compared with 30% (95% CI, 15%-45%) in the control population (P = .24) (Figure 3).
In an attempt to assess the effect of DLI, we performed a landmark
analysis comparing OS and PFS within the first 2 years for patients
treated with CD6-depleted BMT and DLI compared with control patients
treated with CD6-depleted BMT alone. In this analysis, only patients
receiving BMT alone who did not develop GVHD and survived 6 months
after transplantation were included (n = 22). This comparison was
done because these patients would have been eligible to receive DLI and
therefore would serve as a better comparison group. The OS at 2 years
in this subset of 14 patients who received both CD 6-depleted BMT and
DLI, 83% (95% CI, 60%-100%), was similar to the subset of patients
who received CD6-depleted BMT alone, 68% (95% CI, 49%-89%)
(P = .40). However, in this subset analysis the current
PFS at 1 and 2 years after transplantation for the CD6-depleted BMT and
DLI group is 93% (95% CI, 80%-100%) and 65% (95% CI, 37%-93%),
respectively, compared with 68% (95% CI, 49%-87%) and 41% (95%
CI, 20%-62%) in the BMT only group (P = .13) (Figure
4). Longer follow-up will be needed to
assess the full effect of DLI on PFS.
Prognostic features associated with OS and PFS All 62 patients, including the 24 from the current study and 38 patients who received CD6 T-cell-depleted BMT alone, were analyzed for prognostic features that predicted OS and PFS. Features analyzed included age, stage of disease at diagnosis, MM immunoglobulin class, donor gender-patient gender, and interval from diagnosis to BMT (Table 3). Univariate analysis demonstrated that both advanced stage at diagnosis and IgA predicted for worse OS (P = .024 and P = .04, respectively) and worse PFS (P < .001 and P = 0.07, respectively). Response at BMT was also predictive of PFS (P = .01) in univariate analyses. After adjusting for other factors in a multivariate model, stage of disease was determined to be significantly associated with OS and PFS (P = .01 and P < .001, respectively). A 2.5-increased risk of mortality was noted in patients with stage III disease compared with earlier stages of disease at diagnosis. For PFS, the estimated relative risk for stage III patients compared with earlier stages was 3.3. Similar results were found for current PFS, with stage III patients at a 2.7-fold increased risk versus earlier stage disease (P = .004).
In the present study, CD4+ DLI induced a significant GVM effect when administered 6 to 9 months after BMT. Thirteen of 14 (93%) patients with persistent disease after transplantation responded to DLI, with 6 patients obtaining a CR. With the addition of DLI to CD6-depleted BMT there appears to be a trend toward improved PFS after transplantation because recipients of CD6-depleted BMT plus DLI have a 2-year current PFS of 65%, compared with 41% in a cohort of patients treated with CD6-depleted BMT alone who would have been eligible to receive DLI. Although improvement in PFS may translate into improved OS with additional follow-up, only 58% of patients in the current study were able to receive DLI after BMT because of BMT-related complications. Therefore, despite the encouraging results of CD6-depleted BMT and CD4+ DLI, not all patients are able to benefit from this treatment strategy because of the toxicities noted after BMT. This experience suggests that new transplantation conditioning approaches are necessary to allow the majority of patients to receive DLI and to benefit from the GVM effect. Previous reports of allogeneic BMT in patients with MM have documented a high TRM of 25% to 56%.1,2 The high TRM is related to an increased incidence of GVHD in these patients, as well as transplantation-related complications such as veno-occlusive disease, interstitial pneumonitis, and infection. The increased risk of GVHD may be due to the advanced age of patients with MM undergoing transplantation and to the increased risk of infection after transplantation attributable to the prior use of high doses of corticosteroid therapy. Importantly, despite the high TRM, allogeneic BMT results in long-term disease-free survival for some patients. Bensinger et al2 reported a 36% CR rate after allogeneic BMT in patients with highly refractory MM, with an OS and PFS of 20% and 16%, respectively, at 5 years after transplantation. In a more heterogeneous population of patients receiving a variety of transplantation regimens and GVHD prophylaxis, the EBMTR reported a lower (25%) overall TRM.1 In the EBMTR experience, the CR rate was 44%, with an actuarial OS at 4 and 9 years after transplantation of 32% and 18%, respectively. In the current study, the goal was to reduce the TRM using a CD6-depleted BMT and to reduce relapse by administering CD4+ DLI to induce a GVM effect after transplantation. Although significant transplantation-related toxicity was decreased and a potent GVM effect was demonstrated after DLI, complications of BMT still precluded DLI in a significant number of patients. The significant GVM effect induced by DLI confirms prior observations of anti-MM activity mediated by donor lymphocytes in patients who have relapsed after allogeneic BMT.5,7-9 In a summary of DLI in patients with relapsed MM after allogeneic BMT, 62% of patients demonstrated a response after DLI.10 In the current study, all patients with persistent disease demonstrated a response to DLI, suggesting that early treatment after BMT may improve response rates. This finding mirrors the experience in CML in which DLI is more effective in patients with molecular and cytogenetic evidence of disease after transplantation compared with patients treated in hematologic relapse. Infusion of a lower number of cells may be able to achieve a significant GVM effect when administered early after BMT. Infusions of more than 1 × 108 cells/kg appear to be needed to treat patients with relapsed MM.9 Unfortunately, toxicity of DLI is increased in patients who receive this cell dose, with 100% of responding patients developing GVHD in that recent study. Infusion of lower cell doses appears capable of inducing CRs in other diseases, such as CML. A cell dose of 1 × 107 CD3+ cells/kg is associated with a complete cytogenetic response rate in 42% of patients with relapsed stable-phase CML in the absence of significant GVHD.15 The high response rate to DLI observed in the current study suggests that a lower cell dose may be effective in treating patients with persistent disease early after BMT, as compared with the higher doses needed to treat patients in overt relapse. As with other diseases responsive to DLI, the median time to maximal response after DLI in patients with MM is prolonged. Our experience demonstrates that patients' paraprotein levels may rise in the first month after DLI even in those patients destined to develop significant responses. The median time to maximal response in our study after a single DLI is 6 months, with a single patient achieving CR only at 35 months after DLI. Because time to response after DLI may be prolonged and the infusion of additional donor cells associated with increased toxicity, patients should be monitored for response for a significant period of time after DLI. The optimal timing of DLI to maximize efficacy and to minimize toxicity after BMT remains to be defined. DLI very early after BMT is associated with an increased risk of GVHD compared with later infusions: DLI at day 30 after BMT led to an increased risk of GVHD compared with DLI after day 45.16 However, timing of DLI may not be such an important factor at prolonged intervals after transplantation. For example, in a previous study we observed no difference in the incidence of GVHD when patients received DLI at less than one year versus more than a year after BMT.8 In addition, no relationship between time from transplantation to DLI was noted in 2 large registry reports.5,6 The toxicity and efficacy of DLI prior to 6 months after BMT should be further explored because early DLI may be more efficacious. As with other diseases, there appears to be a strong association between GVM and GVHD. In a review of multiple studies of DLI in patients with relapsed MM, a statistically significant correlation between GVHD and response was noted in MM patients treated with DLI: 18 of 22 patients who responded to DLI developed GVHD, whereas only 2 of 7 patients who did not respond developed GVHD.10 Although depletion of CD8+ cells has been shown to reduce the incidence of GVHD after DLI,8,17 GVHD remains a significant complication of DLI in the current study. A comparative trial of CD8-depleted DLI and unmanipulated DLI is under way at our institute to clarify whether CD8 depletion leads to a reduction in GVHD after DLI. Ideally, the infusion of antigen-specific T cells would be the most effective way to induce a GVM effect in the absence of GVHD, because some experimental evidence demonstrates that distinct populations of T cells may mediate GVHD versus GVM. In a detailed analysis of patients with relapsed MM treated with CD4+ DLI, we have identified distinct clonal populations of T cells that correlated with GVM and GVHD.18 Moreover, in the current study, 2 patients developed a CR in the absence of clinical GHVD, further suggesting that GVM and GVHD may, at least in some cases, be distinct. Ultimately, it may be possible to generate antigen-specific T cells in vivo by vaccination or ex vivo for adoptive immunotherapy and thereby achieve GVM without GVHD. Already, idiotype-specific donor T cells have also been generated from donor vaccination.19 Although this study demonstrates that DLI is capable of inducing a significant GVM effect when administered 6 to 9 months after transplantation, only 58% of patients were able to receive the DLI. Despite T-cell-depleted transplantation, nearly half of the patients still developed complications that prevented them from receiving DLI. For allogeneic transplantation and DLI to be an effective treatment strategy in MM, a transplantation regimen associated with less toxicity is therefore needed. Nonmyeloablative transplantation strategies that use lower doses of chemotherapy or radiotherapy may provide this approach and allow more patients to benefit from DLI administration. Giralt et al20 have reported results on 13 patients with MM treated with melphalan and fludarabine as nonmyeloablative therapy, followed by CD34+-selected allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. All evaluable patients achieved 100% donor cell engraftment by day 30; however, 5 patients developed significant GVHD after BMT despite GVHD prophylaxis. Ongoing studies will define the optimal nonmyeloablative transplantation regimen to both avoid the toxicity of transplantation and provide a platform for the administration of DLI.
Submitted November 8, 2000; accepted February 26, 2001.
Supported by grants AI29530 and CA78378 from the National Institutes of Health.
E.A. is a Special Fellow of the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society of America, R.S. is a Scholar in Clinical Research of the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society of America, and K.A. Anderson is a Doris Duke Distinguished Clinical Research Scientist.
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: Edwin Alyea, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02115; e-mail: edwin_alyea{at}dfci.harvard.edu.
1. Gahrton G, Tura S, Ljungman P, et al. Prognostic factors in allogeneic bone marrow transplantation for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:1312-1322[Abstract].
2.
Bensinger WI, Buckner CD, Anasetti C, et al.
Allogeneic marrow transplantation for multiple myeloma: an analysis of risk factors on outcome.
Blood.
1996;88:2787-2793
3.
Horowitz MM, Gale RP, Sondel PM, et al.
Graft-versus-leukemia reactions after bone marrow transplantation.
Blood.
1990;75:555-562 4. Goldman JM, Gale RP, Horowitz MM, et al. Bone marrow transplantation for chronic myelogenous leukemia in chronic phase. Increased risk for relapse associated with T-cell depletion. Ann Intern Med. 1988;108:806-814.
5.
Collins R, Shpilberg O, Drobyski W, et al.
Donor leukocyte infusions in 140 patients with relapsed malignancy after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation.
J Clin Oncol.
1997;15:433-444
6.
Kolb HJ, Schattenberg A, Goldman JM, et al.
Graft-versus-leukemia effect of donor lymphocyte transfusions in marrow grafted patients.
Blood.
1995;86:2041-2050
7.
Tricot G, Vesole DH, Jagannath S, Hilton J, Munshi N, Barlogie B.
Graft-versus-myeloma effect: proof of principle.
Blood.
1996;87:1196-1198
8.
Alyea EP, Soiffer RJ, Canning C, et al.
Toxicity and efficacy of defined doses of CD4(+) donor lymphocytes for treatment of relapse after allogeneic bone marrow transplant.
Blood.
1998;91:3671-3680
9.
Lokhorst HM, Schattenberg A, Cornelissen JJ, Thomas LL, Verdonck LF.
Donor leukocyte infusions are effective in relapsed multiple myeloma after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation.
Blood.
1997;90:4206-4211 10. Mehta J, Singhal S. Graft-versus-myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1998;22:835-843[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
11.
van Rhee F, Lin F, Cullis JO, et al.
Relapse of chronic myeloid leukemia after allogeneic bone marrow transplant: the case for giving donor leukocyte transfusions before the onset of hematologic relapse.
Blood.
1994;83:3377-3383 12. Kaplan G, Meier P. Non-parametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53:457-481[CrossRef].
13.
Sehn LH, Alyea EP, Weller E, et al.
Comparative outcomes of T-cell-depleted and non-T-cell-depleted allogeneic bone marrow transplantation for chronic myelogenous leukemia: impact of donor lymphocyte infusion.
J Clin Oncol.
1999;17:561-568 14. Rosner B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics. 3rd ed. Boston, MA: PWS-Kent; 1990.
15.
Mackinnon S, Papadapoulos EB, Carabasi MH, et al.
Adoptive immunotherapy evaluating escalating doses of donor leukocytes for relapse of chronic myeloid leukemia after bone marrow transplantation: separation of graft-versus-leukemia responses from graft-versus-host disease.
Blood.
1995;86:1261-1268 16. Barrett AJ, Mavroudis D, Tisdale J, et al. T cell-depleted bone marrow transplantation and delayed T cell add-back to control acute GVHD and conserve a graft-versus-leukemia effect. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1998;21:543-555[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
17.
Giralt S, Hester J, Huh Y, et al.
CD8-depleted donor lymphocyte infusion as treatment for relapsed chronic myelogenous leukemia after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation.
Blood.
1995;86:4337-4343 18. Orsini E, Alyea EP, Schlossman R, et al. Changes in T cell receptor repertoire associated with graft-versus-tumor effect and graft-versus-host disease in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma after donor lymphocyte infusion. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2000;25:623-632[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 19. Kwak LW, Taub DD, Duffey PL, et al. Transfer of myeloma idiotype-specific immunity from an actively immunized marrow donor. Lancet. 1995;345:1016-1020[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 20. Giralt S, Weber D, Cohen A, et al. Non myeloablative conditioning with fludarabine and melphalan for patients with multiple myeloma [abstract]. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 1999;1:L5.
© 2001 by The American Society of Hematology.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
  A. P. Rapoport, E. A. Stadtmauer, N. Aqui, D. Vogl, A. Chew, H.-B. Fang, S. Janofsky, K. Yager, E. Veloso, Z. Zheng, et al. Rapid Immune Recovery and Graft-versus-Host Disease-like Engraftment Syndrome following Adoptive Transfer of Costimulated Autologous T Cells Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2009; 15(13): 4499 - 4507. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Dodero, C. Carniti, A. Raganato, A. Vendramin, L. Farina, F. Spina, C. Carlo-Stella, S. Di Terlizzi, M. Milanesi, P. Longoni, et al. Haploidentical stem cell transplantation after a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen for the treatment of advanced hematologic malignancies: posttransplantation CD8-depleted donor lymphocyte infusions contribute to improve T-cell recovery Blood, May 7, 2009; 113(19): 4771 - 4779. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H.-J. Kolb Graft-versus-leukemia effects of transplantation and donor lymphocytes Blood, December 1, 2008; 112(12): 4371 - 4383. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Liu, A. Hamrouni, D. Wolowiec, V. Coiteux, K. Kuliczkowski, D. Hetuin, A. Saudemont, and B. Quesnel Plasma cells from multiple myeloma patients express B7-H1 (PD-L1) and increase expression after stimulation with IFN-{gamma} and TLR ligands via a MyD88-, TRAF6-, and MEK-dependent pathway Blood, July 1, 2007; 110(1): 296 - 304. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Bellucci, S. Oertelt, M. Gallagher, S. Li, E. Zorn, E. Weller, F. Porcheray, E. P. Alyea, R. J. Soiffer, N. C. Munshi, et al. Differential epitope mapping of antibodies to PDC-E2 in patients with hematologic malignancies after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and primary biliary cirrhosis Blood, March 1, 2007; 109(5): 2001 - 2007. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. H. Antin Reduced-Intensity Stem Cell Transplantation: "...whereof a little More than a little is by much too much." King Henry IV, part 1, I, 2 Hematology, January 1, 2007; 2007(1): 47 - 54. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Attal, P. Moreau, H. Avet-Loiseau, and J.-L. Harousseau Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma Hematology, January 1, 2007; 2007(1): 311 - 316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. G. Meyer, C. M. Britten, D. Wehler, K. Bender, G. Hess, A. Konur, U. F. Hartwig, T. C. Wehler, A. J. Ullmann, C. Gentilini, et al. Prophylactic transfer of CD8-depleted donor lymphocytes after T-cell-depleted reduced-intensity transplantation Blood, January 1, 2007; 109(1): 374 - 382. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. A. Huff and J. E. Karp Should MAGE be the rage in myeloma? Blood, July 1, 2005; 106(1): 5 - 5. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Crawley, M. Lalancette, R. Szydlo, M. Gilleece, K. Peggs, S. Mackinnon, G. Juliusson, L. Ahlberg, A. Nagler, A. Shimoni, et al. Outcomes for reduced-intensity allogeneic transplantation for multiple myeloma: an analysis of prognostic factors from the Chronic Leukaemia Working Party of the EBMT Blood, June 1, 2005; 105(11): 4532 - 4539. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Bellucci, E. P. Alyea, S. Chiaretti, C. J. Wu, E. Zorn, E. Weller, B. Wu, C. Canning, R. Schlossman, N. C. Munshi, et al. Graft-versus-tumor response in patients with multiple myeloma is associated with antibody response to BCMA, a plasma-cell membrane receptor Blood, May 15, 2005; 105(10): 3945 - 3950. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. S. Peggs, K. Thomson, D. P. Hart, J. Geary, E. C. Morris, K. Yong, A. H. Goldstone, D. C. Linch, and S. Mackinnon Dose-escalated donor lymphocyte infusions following reduced intensity transplantation: toxicity, chimerism, and disease responses Blood, February 15, 2004; 103(4): 1548 - 1556. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H.-J. Kolb, C. Schmid, A. J. Barrett, and D. J. Schendel Graft-versus-leukemia reactions in allogeneic chimeras Blood, February 1, 2004; 103(3): 767 - 776. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Bellucci, C. J. Wu, S. Chiaretti, E. Weller, F. E. Davies, E. P. Alyea, G. Dranoff, K. C. Anderson, N. C. Munshi, and J. Ritz Complete response to donor lymphocyte infusion in multiple myeloma is associated with antibody responses to highly expressed antigens Blood, January 15, 2004; 103(2): 656 - 663. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-L. Harousseau, J. Shaughnessy Jr., and P. Richardson Multiple Myeloma Hematology, January 1, 2004; 2004(1): 237 - 256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. G. Maloney, A. J. Molina, F. Sahebi, K. E. Stockerl-Goldstein, B. M. Sandmaier, W. Bensinger, B. Storer, U. Hegenbart, G. Somlo, T. Chauncey, et al. Allografting with nonmyeloablative conditioning following cytoreductive autografts for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma Blood, November 1, 2003; 102(9): 3447 - 3454. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Hayashi, T. Hideshima, M. Akiyama, N. Raje, P. Richardson, D. Chauhan, and K. C. Anderson Ex vivo induction of multiple myeloma-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes Blood, August 15, 2003; 102(4): 1435 - 1442. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. J. Peniket, T. J. Littlewood, and C. G. Winearls The radical treatment of paraprotein disorders affecting the kidney Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., August 1, 2003; 18(8): 1431 - 1434. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. J. Peniket, T. J. Littlewood, and C. G. Winearls The radical treatment of paraprotein disorders affecting the kidney Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., August 1, 2003; 18(88): 1431 - 1434. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A Wei and S Juneja Bone marrow immunohistology of plasma cell neoplasms J. Clin. Pathol., June 1, 2003; 56(6): 406 - 411. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Orsini, R. Bellucci, E. P. Alyea, R. Schlossman, C. Canning, S. McLaughlin, P. Ghia, K. C. Anderson, and J. Ritz Expansion of Tumor-specific CD8+ T Cell Clones in Patients with Relapsed Myeloma after Donor Lymphocyte Infusion Cancer Res., May 15, 2003; 63(10): 2561 - 2568. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. M. Lokhorst, C. M. Segeren, L. F. Verdonck, B. van der Holt, R. Raymakers, M. H.J. van Oers, R. M.Y. Barge, H. C. Schouten, P. H.M. Westveer, M. M.C. Steijaert, et al. Partially T-Cell-Depleted Allogeneic Stem-Cell Transplantation for First-Line Treatment of Multiple Myeloma: A Prospective Evaluation of Patients Treated in the Phase III Study HOVON 24 MM J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2003; 21(9): 1728 - 1733. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Akpek, J. K. Boitnott, L. A. Lee, J. P. Hallick, M. Torbenson, D. A. Jacobsohn, S. Arai, V. Anders, and G. B. Vogelsang Hepatitic variant of graft-versus-host disease after donor lymphocyte infusion Blood, December 1, 2002; 100(12): 3903 - 3907. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. H. Peranteau, S. Hayashi, M. Hsieh, A. F. Shaaban, and A. W. Flake High-level allogeneic chimerism achieved by prenatal tolerance induction and postnatal nonmyeloablative bone marrow transplantation Blood, August 28, 2002; 100(6): 2225 - 2234. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Hayashi, W. H. Peranteau, A. F. Shaaban, and A. W. Flake Complete allogeneic hematopoietic chimerism achieved by a combined strategy of in utero hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and postnatal donor lymphocyte infusion Blood, July 18, 2002; 100(3): 804 - 812. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Guimond, A. Balassy, M. Barrette, S. Brochu, C. Perreault, and D. C. Roy P-glycoprotein targeting: a unique strategy to selectively eliminate immunoreactive T cells Blood, June 28, 2002; 100(2): 375 - 382. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Bellucci, E. P. Alyea, E. Weller, A. Chillemi, E. Hochberg, C. J. Wu, C. Canning, R. Schlossman, R. J. Soiffer, K. C. Anderson, et al. Immunologic effects of prophylactic donor lymphocyte infusion after allogeneic marrow transplantation for multiple myeloma Blood, May 29, 2002; 99(12): 4610 - 4617. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. C. Anderson, J. D. Shaughnessy Jr., B. Barlogie, J.-L. Harousseau, and G. D. Roodman Multiple Myeloma Hematology, January 1, 2002; 2002(1): 214 - 240. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. T. Ho and R. J. Soiffer The history and future of T-cell depletion as graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation Blood, December 1, 2001; 98(12): 3192 - 3204. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
| Copyright © 2001 by American Society of Hematology Online ISSN: 1528-0020 | |||||||||
Top
Abstract
Introduction
II) or extensive chronic GVHD. Two-year estimated overall survival and current progression-free survival (PFS) for all 24 patients is 55% and 42%, respectively. The
14 patients receiving DLI had an improved 2-year current PFS (65%)
when compared with a historical cohort of MM patients who underwent
CD6-depleted BMT survived 6 months with no GVHD and did not receive DLI
(41%) (P = .13). Although this study suggests that
prophylactic DLI induces significant GVM responses after allogeneic
BMT, only 58% of patients were able to receive DLI despite
T-cell-depleted BMT. Therefore, less toxic transplantation strategies
are needed to allow a higher proportion of patients to receive DLI and
the benefit from the GVM effect after transplantation.
(Blood. 2001;98:934-939)
