Before you can access ASH's online program, you must agree to the following:
Last updated January 16, 2009. Please note that this site represents the latest program changes
and differs from the print version in some details.

1170 Randomized Phase II Trial Comparing Cyclosporine (CSP) and Tacrolimus (TAC) for Methotrexate (MTX)-Free Graft-Versus-Host Disease (GVHD) Prophylaxis after Allogeneic Transplantation from a Matched Related Donor (MRD) with a Reduced-Intensity Regimen Containing Cladribine and Busulfan

Saturday, December 6, 2008, 5:30 PM-7:30 PM
Hall A (Moscone Center)
Poster Board I-275

Sung-Won Kim, MD1*, Takahiro Fukuda, MD1*, Shotaro Hagiwara, MD2*, Tsunehiko Komatsu, MD3*, Tetsuya Goto, MD4*, Yasunori Ueda, M.D.5, Toshiro Ito, MD6*, Masayuki Hino, MD7, Kazutaka Sunami, MD8*, Ryuji Tanosaki, MD1*, Shin-ichiro Mori, MD1*, Masahiro Kami, MD9, Kinuko Tajima1* and Yoichi Takaue, MD1*

1Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
2Department of Hematology, International Medical Center of Japan, Tokyo, Japan
3Department of Hematology, Tsukuba Memorial Hospital, Tsukuba, Japan
4Department of Hematology, Tokushima Red Cross Hospital, Komatsushima, Japan
5Department of Haematology/Oncology, Kurashiki Central Hospital, Kurashiki city, Okayama, Japan
6Department of Hematology, Shinshu University Hospital, Matsumoto, Japan
7Department of Hematology, Osaka City University Hospital, Osaka, Japan
8Department of Hematology, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, Okayama, Japan
9Division of Exploratory Research, Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo University, Tokyo, Japan

Background: Although GVHD prophylaxis without MTX might enhance a graft-versus-leukemia effect, no randomized controlled trial (RCT) of GVHD prophylaxis has investigated this possibility in a reduced-intensity stem cell transplantation (RIST) setting. Therefore, we conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare CSP and TAC without MTX as GVHD prophylaxis in RIST from a MRD.

Methods: Patients with hematological malignancies in complete remission or with a chemosensitive status were eligible for this study if they were either older than 50 years or had significant medical contraindications for conventional transplantation. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD on day 100. Regimen-related toxicities (RRT) between day -8 and day 28 were assessed by NCI-CTC ver 2.0. The conditioning regimen consisted of cladribine (0.11 mg/kg x 6 days) and oral busulfan (4 mg/kg x 2 days). All patients received unmanipulated G-CSF-mobilized peripheral blood stem cells from a MRD. CSP (starting dose 3 mg/kg/day, target whole blood conc. 250-350 ng/mL, target trough level 150-250 ng/mL) or TAC (starting dose 0.03 mg/kg/day, target whole blood conc. 10-20 ng/mL, target trough level 5-10 ng/mL) was given as GVHD prophylaxis from day -1. G-CSF was administered from day +6 until neutrophil engraftment.

Results: Sixty-eight patients were enrolled between 2/2003 and 2/2008, but 3 were removed before transplant because of disease progression or infection. The diagnoses included lymphoma (n=27; 10 FL, 6 DLBCL, 6 PTCL and 5 HL), AML (n=14), MDS (n=12), MM (n=5), MPD (n=4) and ALL (n=3). The median age of the patients (56 y vs. 55 y) and the median number of CD34+ cells infused (3.7 x106 /kg vs. 3.1 x106 /kg) were similar in the CSP and TAC arms. The median day of neutrophil engraftment in both arms was day 11. The proportion of patients in the CSP or TAC arm who achieved complete chimerism in CD3+ cell fraction on days 28, 56 and 90 was, respectively, 61% vs. 48%, 80% vs. 76% and 80% vs. 97%. Grade 4 RRT was hepatic disease (n=1, CSP arm), and grade 3 RRT included cardiac (n=1, CSP), renal (n=1, CSP), hepatic (n=2, CSP), oral mucosal (n=1, TAC) and gastrointestinal disease (n=4, CSP vs. n=3, TAC). The incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD in the TAC arm was significantly lower than that in the CSP arm (Table & Figure). The incidences of grade III-IV acute GVHD and extensive chronic GVHD were not significantly different between the two arms. The non-relapse mortality (NRM) in the TAC arm was significantly lower than that in the CSP arm. The causes of death that contributed to NRM were infection in 6 (CSP arm), GVHD in one (CSP), ARDS in one (TAC) and lung cancer in one (CSP). The relapse rate and relapse-related mortality were not significantly different between the two arms. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 1295 days (169-1954). The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates in the TAC arm tended to be higher than those in the CSP arm.

Conclusions: A regimen with TAC alone without MTX as GVHD prophylaxis was associated with significantly lower rates of grade II-IV acute GVHD and NRM compared to a regimen with CSP alone after RIST from a MRD. OS and PFS with TAC alone tended to be higher than those with CSP alone. Nevertheless, these results must be considered with care due to the small number of patients, and the optimal use of both drugs is still under investigation. A large-scale RCT to identify suitable GVHD prophylaxis in the RIST setting is warranted.

 

Table: Study Outcomes

 

CSP arm (n=33)

TAC arm (n=32)

P

Grade II-IV acute GVHD

64%

39%

0.040

Grade III-IV acute GVHD

30%

23%

N.S

Extensive chronic GVHD

63%

61%

N.S

1-year/3-year NRM

26%/38%

0%/5%

0.008

1-year/3-year relapse

35%/43%

25%/49%

N.S

1-year/3-year relapse mortality

27%/33%

10%/42%

N.S

1-year/3-year OS

57%/45%

90%/56%

0.135 (0.039*)

1-year/3-year PFS

48%/35%

75%/48%

0.120 (0.047*)

P value was evaluated with logrank test or Wilcoxon test*.

 

Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

See more of: Clinical Transplantation – Acute and Chronic GVHD, Infectious Complications, and Immune Reconstitution Poster I
See more of: Oral and Poster Abstracts
<< Previous Presentation | Next Presentation >>

*signifies non-member of ASH