User login
Creating CAR T-cell therapies for T-cell malignancies
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – Preclinical research has revealed workarounds that may make chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy feasible for patients with T-cell malignancies.
Researchers have found that using allogeneic cells for CAR T-cell therapy can eliminate contamination by malignant T cells, and editing those allogeneic T cells to delete the target antigen and the T-cell receptor alpha chain (TRAC) can prevent fratricide and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD).
Additionally, an interleukin-7 molecule called NT-I7 has been shown to enhance CAR T-cell proliferation, differentiation, and tumor killing in a mouse model of a T-cell malignancy.
John F. DiPersio, MD, PhD, of Washington University in St. Louis, described this work in a presentation at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.
Obstacles to development
“The primary obstacle for targeting T-cell malignancies with a T cell is that all of the targets that are on the [malignant] T cells are also expressed on the normal T cells,” Dr. DiPersio said. “So when you put a CAR into a normal T cell, it just kills itself. It’s called fratricide.”
A second issue that has limited development is that the phenotype of the malignant T cell in the blood is similar to a normal T cell, so they can’t be separated, he explained.
“So if you were to do anything to a normal T cell, you would also be doing it, in theory, to the malignant T cell – in theory, making it resistant to therapy,” he said.
A third obstacle, which has been seen in patients with B-cell malignancies as well, is the inability to harvest enough T cells to generate effective CAR T-cell therapy.
And a fourth obstacle is that T cells from patients with malignancies may not function normally because they have been exposed to prior therapies.
Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues believe these obstacles can be overcome by creating CAR T-cell therapies using T cells derived from healthy donors or cord blood, using gene editing to remove the target antigen and TRAC, and using NT-I7 to enhance the efficacy of these universal, “off-the-shelf” CAR T cells.
The researchers have tested these theories, and achieved successes, in preclinical models. The team is now planning a clinical trial in patients at Washington University. Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues also created a company called WUGEN that will develop the universal CAR T-cell therapies if the initial proof-of-principle trial proves successful.
UCART7
One of the universal CAR T-cell therapies Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues have tested is UCART7, which targets CD7. Dr. DiPersio noted that CD7 is expressed on 98% of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemias (T-ALLs), 24% of acute myeloid leukemias, natural killer (NK) cells, and T cells.
The researchers created UCART7 by using CRISPR/Cas9 to delete CD7 and TRAC from allogeneic T cells and following this with lentiviral transduction with a third-generation CD7-CAR. The team found a way to delete both TRAC and CD7 in a single day with 95% efficiency, Dr. DiPersio noted.
“Knocking out CD7 doesn’t seem to have any impact on the expansion or trafficking of these T cells in vivo,” Dr. DiPersio said. “So we think that deleting that target in a normal T cell will not affect its overall ability to kill a target when we put a CAR into those T cells.”
In fact, the researchers’ experiments showed that UCART7 can kill T-ALL cells in vitro and target primary T-ALL in vivo without inducing GVHD (Leukemia. 2018 Sep;32[9]:1970-83.)
UCART2 and NT-I7
Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues have also tested UCART2, an allogeneic CAR T-cell therapy in which CD2 and TRAC are deleted. The therapy targets CD2 because this antigen is expressed on T-ALL and other T-cell and NK-cell malignancies. Experiments showed that UCART2 targets T-cell malignancies, including T-ALL and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, in vitro.
The researchers also tested UCART2 in a mouse model of Sézary syndrome. In these experiments, UCART2 was combined with NT-I7.
NT-I7 enhanced the proliferation, persistence, and tumor killing ability of UCART2. Sézary mice that received UCART2 and NT-I7 had “virtually no tumor burden,” according to researchers, and survived longer than mice treated with UCART2 alone (Blood. 2018;132:340).
Dr. DiPersio noted that there was no cytokine release syndrome because these were immunodeficient mice. However, cytokine release syndrome may be a side effect of NT-I7 in patients as NT-I7 induces rapid expansion of CAR T cells.
Dr. DiPersio reported ownership and investment in WUGEN and Magenta Therapeutics. He also has relationships with Cellworks Group, Tioma Therapeutics, RiverVest Venture Partners, Bioline, Asterias Biotherapeutics, Amphivena Therapeutics, Bluebird Bio, Celgene, Incyte, NeoImuneTech, and MacroGenics.
The Acute Leukemia Forum is organized by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – Preclinical research has revealed workarounds that may make chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy feasible for patients with T-cell malignancies.
Researchers have found that using allogeneic cells for CAR T-cell therapy can eliminate contamination by malignant T cells, and editing those allogeneic T cells to delete the target antigen and the T-cell receptor alpha chain (TRAC) can prevent fratricide and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD).
Additionally, an interleukin-7 molecule called NT-I7 has been shown to enhance CAR T-cell proliferation, differentiation, and tumor killing in a mouse model of a T-cell malignancy.
John F. DiPersio, MD, PhD, of Washington University in St. Louis, described this work in a presentation at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.
Obstacles to development
“The primary obstacle for targeting T-cell malignancies with a T cell is that all of the targets that are on the [malignant] T cells are also expressed on the normal T cells,” Dr. DiPersio said. “So when you put a CAR into a normal T cell, it just kills itself. It’s called fratricide.”
A second issue that has limited development is that the phenotype of the malignant T cell in the blood is similar to a normal T cell, so they can’t be separated, he explained.
“So if you were to do anything to a normal T cell, you would also be doing it, in theory, to the malignant T cell – in theory, making it resistant to therapy,” he said.
A third obstacle, which has been seen in patients with B-cell malignancies as well, is the inability to harvest enough T cells to generate effective CAR T-cell therapy.
And a fourth obstacle is that T cells from patients with malignancies may not function normally because they have been exposed to prior therapies.
Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues believe these obstacles can be overcome by creating CAR T-cell therapies using T cells derived from healthy donors or cord blood, using gene editing to remove the target antigen and TRAC, and using NT-I7 to enhance the efficacy of these universal, “off-the-shelf” CAR T cells.
The researchers have tested these theories, and achieved successes, in preclinical models. The team is now planning a clinical trial in patients at Washington University. Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues also created a company called WUGEN that will develop the universal CAR T-cell therapies if the initial proof-of-principle trial proves successful.
UCART7
One of the universal CAR T-cell therapies Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues have tested is UCART7, which targets CD7. Dr. DiPersio noted that CD7 is expressed on 98% of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemias (T-ALLs), 24% of acute myeloid leukemias, natural killer (NK) cells, and T cells.
The researchers created UCART7 by using CRISPR/Cas9 to delete CD7 and TRAC from allogeneic T cells and following this with lentiviral transduction with a third-generation CD7-CAR. The team found a way to delete both TRAC and CD7 in a single day with 95% efficiency, Dr. DiPersio noted.
“Knocking out CD7 doesn’t seem to have any impact on the expansion or trafficking of these T cells in vivo,” Dr. DiPersio said. “So we think that deleting that target in a normal T cell will not affect its overall ability to kill a target when we put a CAR into those T cells.”
In fact, the researchers’ experiments showed that UCART7 can kill T-ALL cells in vitro and target primary T-ALL in vivo without inducing GVHD (Leukemia. 2018 Sep;32[9]:1970-83.)
UCART2 and NT-I7
Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues have also tested UCART2, an allogeneic CAR T-cell therapy in which CD2 and TRAC are deleted. The therapy targets CD2 because this antigen is expressed on T-ALL and other T-cell and NK-cell malignancies. Experiments showed that UCART2 targets T-cell malignancies, including T-ALL and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, in vitro.
The researchers also tested UCART2 in a mouse model of Sézary syndrome. In these experiments, UCART2 was combined with NT-I7.
NT-I7 enhanced the proliferation, persistence, and tumor killing ability of UCART2. Sézary mice that received UCART2 and NT-I7 had “virtually no tumor burden,” according to researchers, and survived longer than mice treated with UCART2 alone (Blood. 2018;132:340).
Dr. DiPersio noted that there was no cytokine release syndrome because these were immunodeficient mice. However, cytokine release syndrome may be a side effect of NT-I7 in patients as NT-I7 induces rapid expansion of CAR T cells.
Dr. DiPersio reported ownership and investment in WUGEN and Magenta Therapeutics. He also has relationships with Cellworks Group, Tioma Therapeutics, RiverVest Venture Partners, Bioline, Asterias Biotherapeutics, Amphivena Therapeutics, Bluebird Bio, Celgene, Incyte, NeoImuneTech, and MacroGenics.
The Acute Leukemia Forum is organized by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – Preclinical research has revealed workarounds that may make chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy feasible for patients with T-cell malignancies.
Researchers have found that using allogeneic cells for CAR T-cell therapy can eliminate contamination by malignant T cells, and editing those allogeneic T cells to delete the target antigen and the T-cell receptor alpha chain (TRAC) can prevent fratricide and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD).
Additionally, an interleukin-7 molecule called NT-I7 has been shown to enhance CAR T-cell proliferation, differentiation, and tumor killing in a mouse model of a T-cell malignancy.
John F. DiPersio, MD, PhD, of Washington University in St. Louis, described this work in a presentation at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.
Obstacles to development
“The primary obstacle for targeting T-cell malignancies with a T cell is that all of the targets that are on the [malignant] T cells are also expressed on the normal T cells,” Dr. DiPersio said. “So when you put a CAR into a normal T cell, it just kills itself. It’s called fratricide.”
A second issue that has limited development is that the phenotype of the malignant T cell in the blood is similar to a normal T cell, so they can’t be separated, he explained.
“So if you were to do anything to a normal T cell, you would also be doing it, in theory, to the malignant T cell – in theory, making it resistant to therapy,” he said.
A third obstacle, which has been seen in patients with B-cell malignancies as well, is the inability to harvest enough T cells to generate effective CAR T-cell therapy.
And a fourth obstacle is that T cells from patients with malignancies may not function normally because they have been exposed to prior therapies.
Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues believe these obstacles can be overcome by creating CAR T-cell therapies using T cells derived from healthy donors or cord blood, using gene editing to remove the target antigen and TRAC, and using NT-I7 to enhance the efficacy of these universal, “off-the-shelf” CAR T cells.
The researchers have tested these theories, and achieved successes, in preclinical models. The team is now planning a clinical trial in patients at Washington University. Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues also created a company called WUGEN that will develop the universal CAR T-cell therapies if the initial proof-of-principle trial proves successful.
UCART7
One of the universal CAR T-cell therapies Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues have tested is UCART7, which targets CD7. Dr. DiPersio noted that CD7 is expressed on 98% of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemias (T-ALLs), 24% of acute myeloid leukemias, natural killer (NK) cells, and T cells.
The researchers created UCART7 by using CRISPR/Cas9 to delete CD7 and TRAC from allogeneic T cells and following this with lentiviral transduction with a third-generation CD7-CAR. The team found a way to delete both TRAC and CD7 in a single day with 95% efficiency, Dr. DiPersio noted.
“Knocking out CD7 doesn’t seem to have any impact on the expansion or trafficking of these T cells in vivo,” Dr. DiPersio said. “So we think that deleting that target in a normal T cell will not affect its overall ability to kill a target when we put a CAR into those T cells.”
In fact, the researchers’ experiments showed that UCART7 can kill T-ALL cells in vitro and target primary T-ALL in vivo without inducing GVHD (Leukemia. 2018 Sep;32[9]:1970-83.)
UCART2 and NT-I7
Dr. DiPersio and his colleagues have also tested UCART2, an allogeneic CAR T-cell therapy in which CD2 and TRAC are deleted. The therapy targets CD2 because this antigen is expressed on T-ALL and other T-cell and NK-cell malignancies. Experiments showed that UCART2 targets T-cell malignancies, including T-ALL and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, in vitro.
The researchers also tested UCART2 in a mouse model of Sézary syndrome. In these experiments, UCART2 was combined with NT-I7.
NT-I7 enhanced the proliferation, persistence, and tumor killing ability of UCART2. Sézary mice that received UCART2 and NT-I7 had “virtually no tumor burden,” according to researchers, and survived longer than mice treated with UCART2 alone (Blood. 2018;132:340).
Dr. DiPersio noted that there was no cytokine release syndrome because these were immunodeficient mice. However, cytokine release syndrome may be a side effect of NT-I7 in patients as NT-I7 induces rapid expansion of CAR T cells.
Dr. DiPersio reported ownership and investment in WUGEN and Magenta Therapeutics. He also has relationships with Cellworks Group, Tioma Therapeutics, RiverVest Venture Partners, Bioline, Asterias Biotherapeutics, Amphivena Therapeutics, Bluebird Bio, Celgene, Incyte, NeoImuneTech, and MacroGenics.
The Acute Leukemia Forum is organized by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ALF 2019
Management of Early Pulmonary Complications After Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is widely used in the economically developed world to treat a variety of hematologic malignancies as well as nonmalignant diseases and solid tumors. An estimated 17,900 HSCTs were performed in 2011, and survival rates continue to increase.1 Pulmonary complications post HSCT are common, with rates ranging from 40% to 60%, and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality.2
Clinical diagnosis of pulmonary complications in the HSCT population has been aided by a previously well-defined chronology of the most common diseases.3 Historically, early pulmonary complications were defined as pulmonary complications occurring within 100 days of HSCT (corresponding to the acute graft-versus-host disease [GVHD] period). Late pulmonary complications are those that occur thereafter. This timeline, however, is now more variable given the increasing indications for HSCT, the use of reduced-intensity conditioning strategies, and varied individual immune reconstitution. This article discusses the management of early post-HSCT pulmonary complications; late post-HSCT pulmonary complications will be discussed in a separate follow-up article.
Transplant Basics
The development of pulmonary complications is affected by many factors associated with the transplant. Autologous transplantation involves the collection of a patient’s own stem cells, appropriate storage and processing, and re-implantation after induction therapy. During induction therapy, the patient undergoes high-dose chemotherapy or radiation therapy that ablates the bone marrow. The stem cells are then transfused back into the patient to repopulate the bone marrow. Allogeneic transplants involve the collection of stem cells from a donor. Donors are matched as closely as possible to the recipient’s histocompatibility antigen (HLA) haplotypes to prevent graft failure and rejection. The donor can be related or unrelated to the recipient. If there is not a possibility of a related match (from a sibling), then a national search is undertaken to look for a match through the National Marrow Donor Program. There are fewer transplant reactions and occurrences of GVHD if the major HLAs of the donor and recipient match. Table 1 reviews basic definitions pertaining to HSCT.
How the cells for transplantation are obtained is also an important factor in the rate of complications. There are 3 main sources: peripheral blood, bone marrow, and umbilical cord. Peripheral stem cell harvesting involves exposing the donor to granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (gCSF), which increases peripheral circulation of stem cells. These cells are then collected and infused into the recipient after the recipient has completed an induction regimen involving chemotherapy and/or radiation, depending on the protocol. This procedure is called peripheral blood stem cell transplant (PBSCT). Stem cells can also be directly harvested from bone marrow cells, which are collected from repeated aspiration of bone marrow from the posterior iliac crest.4 This technique is most common in children, whereas in adults peripheral blood stem cells are the most common source. Overall mortality does not differ based on the source of the stem cells. It is postulated that GVHD may be more common in patients undergoing PBSCT, but the graft failure rate may be lower.5
The third option is umbilical cord blood (UCB) as the source of stem cells. This involves the collection of umbilical cord blood that is prepared and frozen after birth. It has a smaller volume of cells, and although fewer cells are needed when using UCB, 2 separate donors may be required for a single adult recipient. The engraftment of the stem cells is slower and infections in the post-transplant period are more common. Prior reports indicate GVHD rates may be lower.4 While the use of UCB is not common in adults, the incidence has doubled over the past decade, increasing from 3% to 6%.
The conditioning regimen can influence pulmonary complications. Traditionally, an ablative transplant involves high-dose chemotherapy or radiation to eradicate the recipient’s bone marrow. This regimen can lead to many complications, especially in the immediate post-transplant period. In the past 10 years, there has been increasing interest in non-myeloablative, or reduced-intensity, conditioning transplants.6 These “mini transplants” involve smaller doses of chemotherapy or radiation, which do not totally eradicate the bone marrow; after the transplant a degree of chimerism develops where the donor and recipient stem cells coexist. The medications in the preparative regimen also should be considered because they can affect pulmonary complications after transplant. Certain chemotherapeutic agents such as carmustine, bleomycin, and many others can lead to acute and chronic presentations of pulmonary diseases such as hypersensitivity pneumonitis, pulmonary fibrosis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and abnormal pulmonary function testing.
After the HSCT, GVHD can develop in more than 50% of allogeneic recipients.3 The incidence of GVHD has been reported to be increasing over the past 12 years.It is divided into acute GVHD (which traditionally happens in the first 100 days after transplant) and chronic GVHD (after day 100). This calendar-day–based system has been augmented based on a 2006 National Institutes of Health working group report emphasizing the importance of organ-specific features of chronic GVHD in the clinical presentation of GVHD.7 Histologic changes in chronic organ GVHD tend to include more fibrotic features, whereas in acute GVHD more inflammatory changes are seen. The NIH working group report also stressed the importance of obtaining a biopsy specimen for histopathologic review and interdisciplinary collaboration to arrive at a consensus diagnosis, and noted the limitations of using histologic changes as the sole determinant of a “gold standard” diagnosis.7 GVHD can directly predispose patients to pulmonary GVHD and indirectly predispose them to infectious complications because the mainstay of therapy for GVHD is increased immunosuppression.
Pretransplant Evaluation
Case Patient 1
A 56-year-old man is diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) after presenting with signs and symptoms consistent with pancytopenia. He has a past medical history of chronic sinus congestion, arthritis, depression, chronic pain, and carpal tunnel surgery. He is employed as an oilfield worker and has a 40-pack-year smoking history, but he recently cut back to half a pack per day. He is being evaluated for allogeneic transplant with his brother as the donor and the planned conditioning regimen is total body irradiation (TBI), thiotepa, cyclophosphamide, and antithymocyte globulin with T-cell depletion. Routine pretransplant pulmonary function testing (PFT) reveals a restrictive pattern and he is sent for pretransplant pulmonary evaluation.
Physical exam reveals a chronically ill appearing man. He is afebrile, the respiratory rate is 16 breaths/min, blood pressure is 145/88 mm Hg, heart rate is 92 beats/min, and oxygen saturation is 95%. He is in no distress. Auscultation of the chest reveals slightly diminished breath sounds bilaterally but is clear and without wheezes, rhonchi, or rales. Heart exam shows regular rate and rhythm without murmurs, rubs, or gallops. Extremities reveal no edema or rashes. Otherwise, the remainder of the exam is normal. The patient’s PFT results are shown in Table 2.
- What aspects of this patient’s history put him at risk for pulmonary complications after transplantation?
Risk Factors for Pulmonary Complications
Predicting who is at risk for pulmonary complications is difficult. Complications are generally divided into infectious and noninfectious categories. Regardless of category, allogeneic HSCT recipients are at increased risk compared with autologous recipients, but even in autologous transplants, more than 25% of patients will develop pulmonary complications in the first year.8 Prior to transplant, patients undergo full PFT. Early on, many studies attempted to show relationships between various factors and post-transplant pulmonary complications. Factors that were implicated were forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (D
Another sometimes overlooked risk before transplantation is restrictive lung disease. One study showed a twofold increase in respiratory failure and mortality if there was pretransplant restriction based on TLC < 80%.16
An interesting study by one group in pretransplant evaluation found decreased muscle strength by maximal inspiratory muscle strength (PImax), maximal expiratory muscle strength (PEmax), dominant hand grip strength, and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance prior to allogeneic transplant, but did not find a relationship between these variables and mortality.17 While this study had a small sample size, these findings likely deserve continued investigation.18
- What methods are used to calculate risk for complications?
Risk Scoring Systems
Several pretransplantation risk scores have been developed. In a study that looked at more than 2500 allogeneic transplants, Parimon et al showed that risk of mortality and respiratory failure could be estimated prior to transplant using a scoring system—the Lung Function Score (LFS)—that combines the FEV1 and D
The Pretransplantation Assessment of Mortality score, initially developed in 2006, predicts mortality within the first 2 years after HSCT based on 8 clinical factors: disease risk, age at transplant, donor type, conditioning regimen, and markers of organ function (percentage of predicted FEV1, percentage of predicted D
- What other preoperative testing or interventions should be considered in this patient?
Since there is a high risk of infectious complications after transplant, the question of whether pretransplantation patients should undergo screening imaging may arise. There is no evidence that routine chest computed tomography (CT) reduces the risk of infectious complications after transplantation.26 An area that may be insufficiently addressed in the pretransplantation evaluation is smoking cessation counseling.27 Studies have shown an elevated risk of mortality in smokers.28-30 Others have found a higher incidence of respiratory failure but not an increased mortality.31 Overall, with the good rates of smoking cessation that can be accomplished, smokers should be counseled to quit before transplantation.
In summary, patients should undergo full PFTs prior to transplantation to help stratify risk for pulmonary complications and mortality and to establish a clinical baseline. The LFS (using FEV1 and D
Case Patient 1 Conclusion
The patient undergoes transplantation due to his lack of other treatment options. Evaluation prior to transplant, however, shows that he is at high risk for pulmonary complications. He has a LFS of 7 prior to transplant (using the D
Early Infectious Pulmonary Complications
Case Patient 2
A 27-year-old man with a medical history significant for AML and allogeneic HSCT presents with cough productive of a small amount of clear to white sputum, dyspnea on exertion, and fevers for 1 week. He also has mild nausea and a decrease in appetite. He underwent HSCT 2.5 months prior to admission, which was a matched unrelated bone marrow transplant with TBI and cyclophosphamide conditioning. His past medical history is significant only for exercise-induced asthma for which he takes a rescue inhaler infrequently prior to transplantation. His pretransplant PFTs showed normal spirometry with an FEV1 of 106% of predicted and D
Physical exam is notable for fever of 101.0°F, heart rate 80 beats/min, respiratory rate 16 breaths/ min, and blood pressure 142/78 mm Hg; an admission oxygen saturation is 93% on room air. Lungs show bibasilar crackles and the remainder of the exam is normal. Laboratory testing shows a white blood cell count of 2400 cells/μL, hemoglobin 7.6 g/dL, and platelet count 66 × 103/μL. Creatinine is 1.0 mg/dL. Chest radiograph shows ill-defined bilateral lower-lobe infiltrates. CT scans are shown in the Figure.
- For which infectious complications is this patient most at risk?
Pneumonia
A prospective trial in the HSCT population reported a pneumonia incidence rate of 68%, and pneumonia is more common in allogeneic HSCT with prolonged immunosuppressive therapy.32 Development of pneumonia within 100 days of transplant directly correlates with nonrelapsed mortality.33 Early detection is key, and bronchoscopy within the first 5 days of symptoms has been shown to change therapy in approximately 40% of cases but has not been shown to affect mortality.34 The clinical presentation of pneumonia in the HSCT population can be variable because of the presence of neutropenia and profound immunosuppression. Traditionally accepted diagnostic criteria of fevers, sputum production, and new infiltrates should be used with caution, and an appropriately high index of suspicion should be maintained. Progression to respiratory failure, regardless of causative organism of infection, portends a poor prognosis, with mortality rates estimated at 70% to 90%.35,36 Several transplant-specific factors may affect early infections. For instance, UCB transplants have been found to have a higher incidence of invasive aspergillosis and cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections but without higher mortality attributed to the infections.37
Bacterial Pneumonia
Bacterial pneumonia accounts for 20% to 50% of pneumonia cases in HSCT recipients.38 Gram-negative organisms, specifically Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli, were reported to be the most common pathologic bacteria in recent prospective trials, whereas previous retrospective trials showed that common community-acquired organisms were the most common cause of pneumonia in HSCT recipients.32,39 This underscores the importance of being aware of the clinical prevalence of microorganisms and local antibiograms, along with associated institutional susceptibility profiles. Initiation of immediate empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics is essential when bacterial pneumonia is suspected.
Viral Pneumonia
The prevalence of viral pneumonia in stem cell transplant recipients is estimated at 28%,32 with most cases being caused by community viral pathogens such as rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza A and B, and parainfluenza.39 The prevention, prophylaxis, and early treatment of viral pneumonias, specifically CMV infection, have decreased the mortality associated with early pneumonia after HSCT. Co-infection with bacterial organisms must be considered and has been associated with increased mortality in the intensive care unit setting.40
Supportive treatment with rhinovirus infection is sufficient as the disease is usually self-limited in immunocompromised patients. In contrast, infection with RSV in the lower respiratory tract is associated with increased mortality in prior reports, and recent studies suggest that further exploration of prophylaxis strategies is warranted.41 Treatment with ribavirin remains the backbone of therapy, but drug toxicity continues to limit its use. The addition of immunomodulators such as RSV immune globulin or palivizumab to ribavirin remains controversial, but a retrospective review suggests that early treatment may prevent progression to lower respiratory tract infection and lead to improved mortality.42 Infection with influenza A/B must be considered during influenza season. Treatment with oseltamivir may shorten the duration of disease when influenza A/B or parainfluenza are detected. Reactivation of latent herpes simplex virus during the pre-engraftment phase should also be considered. Treatment is similar to that in nonimmunocompromised hosts. When CMV pneumonia is suspected, careful history regarding compliance with prophylactic antivirals and CMV status of both the recipient and donor are key. A presumptive diagnosis can be made with the presence of appropriate clinical scenario, supportive radiographic images showing areas of ground-glass opacification or consolidation, and positive CMV polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. Visualization of inclusion bodies on lung biopsy tissue remains the gold standard for diagnosis. Treatment consists of CMV immunoglobulin and ganciclovir.
Fungal Pneumonia
Early fungal pneumonias have been associated with increased mortality in the HSCT population.43 Clinical suspicion should remain high and compliance with antifungal prophylaxis should be questioned thoroughly. Invasive aspergillosis (IA) remains the most common fungal infection. A bimodal distribution of onset of infection peaking on day 16 and again on day 96 has been described in the literature.44 Patients often present with classic pneumonia symptoms, but these may be accompanied by hemoptysis. Proven IA diagnosis requires visualization of fungal forms from biopsy or needle aspiration or a positive culture obtained in a sterile fashion.45 Most clinical data comes from experience with probable and possible diagnosis of IA. Bronchoalveolar lavage with testing with Aspergillus galactomannan assay has been shown to be clinically useful in establishing the clinical diagnosis in the HSCT population.46 Classic air-crescent findings on chest CT are helpful in establishing a possible diagnosis, but retrospective analysis reveals CT findings such as focal infiltrates and pulmonary nodular patterns are more common.47 First-line treatment with voriconazole has been shown to decrease short-term mortality attributable to IA but has not had an effect on long-term, all-cause mortality.48 Surgical resection is reserved for patients with refractory disease or patients presenting with massive hemoptysis.
Mucormycosis is an emerging disease with ever increasing prevalence in the HSCT population, reflecting the improved prophylaxis and treatment of IA. Initial clinical presentation is similar to IA, most commonly affecting the lung, although craniofacial involvement is classic for mucormycosis, especially in HSCT patients with diabetes.49Mucor infections can present with massive hemoptysis due to tissue invasion and disregard for tissue and fascial planes. Diagnosis of mucormycosis is associated with as much as a six-fold increase in risk for death. Diagnosis requires identification of the organism by examination or culture and biopsy is often necessary.50,51 Amphotericin B remains first-line therapy as mucormycosis is resistant to azole antifungals, with higher doses recommended for cerebral involvement.52
Candida pulmonary infections during the early HSCT period are becoming increasingly rare due to widespread use of fluconazole prophylaxis and early treatment of mucosal involvement during neutropenia. Endemic fungal infections such as blastomycosis, coccidioidomycosis, and histoplasmosis should be considered in patients inhabiting specific geographic areas or with recent travel to these areas.
- What test should be performed to evaluate for infectious causes of pneumonia?
Role of Flexible Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy
The utility of flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) in immune-compromised patients for the evaluation of pulmonary infiltrates is a frequently debated topic. Current studies suggest a diagnosis can be made in approximately 80% of cases in the immune-compromised population.32,53 Noninvasive testing such as urine and serum antigens, sputum cultures, Aspergillus galactomannan assays, viral nasal swabs, and PCR studies often lead to a diagnosis in appropriate clinical scenarios. Conservative management would dictate the use of noninvasive testing whenever possible, and randomized controlled trials have shown noninvasive testing to be noninferior to FOB in preventing need for mechanical ventilation, with no difference in overall mortality.54 FOB has been shown to be most useful in establishing a diagnosis when an infectious etiology is suspected.55 In multivariate analysis, a delay in the identification of the etiology of pulmonary infiltrate was associated with increased mortality.56 Additionally, early FOB was found to be superior to late FOB in revealing a diagnosis. 32,57 Despite its ability to detect the cause of pulmonary disease, direct antibiotic therapy, and possibly change therapy, FOB with diagnostic maneuvers has not been shown to affect mortality.58 In a large case series, FOB with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) revealed a diagnosis in approximately 30% to 50% of cases. The addition of transbronchial biopsy did not improve diagnostic utility.58 More recent studies have confirmed that the addition of transbronchial biopsy does not add to diagnostic yield and is associated with increased adverse events.59 The appropriate use of advanced techniques such as endobronchial ultrasound–guided transbronchial needle aspirations, endobronchial biopsy, and CT-guided navigational bronchoscopy has not been established and should be considered on a case-by-case basis. In summary, routine early BAL is the diagnostic test of choice, especially when infectious pulmonary complications are suspected.
Contraindications for FOB in this population mirror those in the general population. These include acute severe hypoxemic respiratory failure, myocardial ischemia or acute coronary syndrome within 2 weeks of procedure, severe thrombocytopenia, and inability to provide or obtain informed consent from patient or health care power of attorney. Coagulopathy and thrombocytopenia are common comorbid conditions in the HSCT population. A platelet count of < 20 × 103/µL has generally been used as a cut-off for routine FOB with BAL.60 Risks of the procedures should be discussed clearly with the patient, but simple FOB for airway evaluation and BAL is generally well tolerated even under these conditions.
Early Nonifectious Pulmonary Complications
Case Patient 2 Continued
Bronchoscopy with BAL performed the day after admission is unremarkable and stains and cultures are negative for viral, bacterial, and fungal organisms. The patient is initially started on broad-spectrum antibiotics, but his oxygenation continues to worsen to the point that he is placed on noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. He is started empirically on amphotericin B and eventually is intubated. VATS lung biopsy is ultimately performed and pathology is consistent with diffuse alveolar damage.
- Based on these biopsy findings, what is the diagnosis?
Based on the pathology consistent with diffuse alveolar damage, a diagnosis of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome (IPS) is made.
- What noninfectious pulmonary complications occur in the early post-transplant period?
The overall incidence of noninfectious pulmonary complications after HSCT is generally estimated at 20% to 30%.32 Acute pulmonary edema is a common very early noninfectious pulmonary complication and clinically the most straightforward to treat. Three distinct clinical syndromes—peri-engraftment respiratory distress syndrome (PERDS), diffuse alveolar hemorrhage (DAH), and IPS—comprise the remainder of the pertinent early noninfectious complications. Clinical presentation differs based upon the disease entity. Recent studies have evaluated the role of angiotensin-converting enzyme polymorphisms as a predictive marker for risk of developing early noninfectious pulmonary complications.61
Peri-Engraftment Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PERDS is a clinical syndrome comprising the cardinal features of erythematous rash and fever along with noncardiogenic pulmonary infiltrates and hypoxemia that occur in the peri-engraftment period, defined as recovery of absolute neutrophil count to > 500/μL on 2 consecutive days.62 PERDS occurs in the autologous HSCT population and may be a clinical correlate to early GVHD in the allogeneic HSCT population. It is hypothesized that the pathophysiology underlying PERDS is an autoimmune-related capillary leak caused by pro-inflammatory cytokine release.63 Treatment remains anecdotal and currently consists of supportive care and high-dose corticosteroids. Some have favored limiting the use of gCSF given its role in stimulating rapid white blood cell recovery.33 Prognosis is favorable, but progression to fulminant respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation portends a poor prognosis.
Diffuse Alveolar Hemorrhage
DAH is clinical syndrome consisting of diffuse alveolar infiltrates on pulmonary imaging combined with progressively bloodier return per aliquot during BAL in 3 different subsegments or more than 20% hemosiderin-laden macrophages on BAL fluid evaluation. Classically, DAH is defined in the absence of pulmonary infection or cardiac dysfunction. The pathophysiology is thought to be related to inflammation of pulmonary vasculature within the alveolar walls leading to alveolitis. Although no prospective trials exist, early use of high-dose corticosteroid therapy is thought to improve outcomes;64,65 a recent study, however, showed low-dose steroids may be associated with the lowest mortality.66 Mortality is directly linked to the presence of superimposed infection, need for mechanical ventilation, late onset, and development of multiorgan failure.67
Idiopathic Pneumonia Syndrome
IPS is a complex clinical syndrome whose pathology is felt to stem from a variety of possible lung insults such as direct myeloablative drug toxicity, occult pulmonary infection, or cytokine-driven inflammation. The ATS published an article further subcategorizing IPS as different clinical entities based upon whether the primary insult involves the vascular endothelium, interstitial tissue, and airway tissue, truly idiopathic, or unclassified.68 In clinical practice, IPS is defined as widespread alveolar injury in the absence of evidence of renal failure, heart failure, and excessive fluid resuscitation. In addition, negative testing for a variety of bacterial, viral, and fungal causes is also necessary.69 Clinical syndromes included within the IPS definition are ARDS, acute interstitial pneumonia, DAH, cryptogenic organizing pneumonia, and BOS.70 Risk factors for developing IPS include TBI, older age of recipient, acute GVHD, and underlying diagnosis of AML or myelodysplastic syndrome.12 In addition, it has been shown that risk for developing IPS is lower in patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT who receive non-myeloablative conditioning regimens.71 The pathologic finding in IPS is diffuse alveolar damage. A 2006 study in which investigators reviewed BAL samples from patients with IPS found that 3% of the patients had PCR evidence of human metapneumovirus infection, and a study in 2015 found PCR evidence of infection in 53% of BAL samples from patients diagnosed with IPS.72,73 This fuels the debate on whether IPS is truly an infection-driven process where the source of infection, pulmonary or otherwise, simply escapes detection. Various surfactant proteins, which play a role in decreasing surface tension within the alveolar interface and function as mediators within the innate immunity of the lung, have been studied in regard to development of IPS. Small retrospective studies have shown a trend toward lower pre-transplant serum protein surfactant D and the development of IPS.74
The diagnosis of IPS does not require pathologic diagnosis in most circumstances. The correct clinical findings in association with a negative infectious workup lead to a presumptive diagnosis of IPS. The extent of the infectious workup that must be completed to adequately rule out infection is often a difficult clinical question. Recent recommendations include BAL fluid evaluation for routine bacterial cultures, appropriate viral culture, and consideration of PCR testing to evaluate for Mycoplasma, Chlamydia, and Aspergillus antigens.75 Transbronchial biopsy continues to appear in recommendations, but is not routinely performed and should be completed as the patient’s clinical status permits.8,68 Table 3 reviews basic features of early noninfectious pulmonary complications.
Treatment of IPS centers around moderate to high doses of corticosteroids. Based on IPS experimental modes, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α has been implicated as an important mediator. Unfortunately, several studies evaluating etanercept have produced conflicting results, and this agent’s clinical effects on morbidity and mortality remain in question.76
- What treatment should be offered to the patient with diffuse alveolar damage on biopsy?
Treatment consists of supportive care and empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics with consideration of high-dose corticosteroids. Based upon early studies in murine models implicating TNF, pilot studies were performed evaluating etanercept as a possible safe and effective addition to high-dose systemic corticosteroids.77 Although these results were promising, data from a truncated randomized control clinical trial failed to show improvement in patient response in the adult population.76 More recent data from the same author suggests that pediatric populations with IPS are, however, responsive to etanercept and high-dose corticosteroid therapy.78 When IPS develops as a late complication, treatment with high-dose corticosteroids (2 mg/kg/day) and etanercept (0.4 mg/kg twice weekly) has been shown to improve 2-year survival.79
Case Patient 2 Conclusion
The patient is started on steroids and makes a speedy recovery. He is successfully extubated 5 days later.
Conclusion
Careful pretransplant evaluation, including a full set of pulmonary function tests, can help predict a patient’s risk for pulmonary complications after transplant, allowing risk factor modification strategies to be implemented prior to transplant, including smoking cessation. It also helps identify patients at high risk for complications who will require closer monitoring after transplantation. Early posttransplant complications include infectious and noninfectious entities. Bacterial, viral, and fungal pneumonias are in the differential of infectious pneumonia, and bronchoscopy can be helpful in establishing a diagnosis. A common, important noninfectious cause of early pulmonary complications is IPS, which is treated with steroids and sometimes anti-TNF therapy.
1. Gratwohl A, Baldomero H, Aljurf M, et al. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a global perspective. JAMA 2010;303:1617–24.
2. Kotloff RM, Ahya VN, Crawford SW. Pulmonary complications of solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004;170:22–48.
4. Copelan EA. Hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. N Engl J Med 2006;354:1813–26.
5. Anasetti C, Logan BR, Lee SJ, et al. Peripheral-blood stem cells versus bone marrow from unrelated donors. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1487–96.
6. Giralt S, Ballen K, Rizzo D, et al. Reduced-intensity conditioning regimen workshop: defining the dose spectrum. Report of a workshop convened by the center for international blood and marrow transplant research. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15:367–9.
7. Shulman HM, Kleiner D, Lee SJ, et al. Histopathologic diagnosis of chronic graft-versus-host disease: National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on Criteria for Clinical Trials in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: II. Pathology Working Group Report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006;12:31–47.
8. Afessa B, Abdulai RM, Kremers WK, et al. Risk factors and outcome of pulmonary complications after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Chest 2012;141:442–50.
9. Bolwell BJ. Are predictive factors clinically useful in bone marrow transplantation? Bone Marrow Transplant 2003;32:853–61.
10. Carlson K, Backlund L, Smedmyr B, et al. Pulmonary function and complications subsequent to autologous bone marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 1994;14:805–11.
11. Clark JG, Schwartz DA, Flournoy N, et al. Risk factors for airflow obstruction in recipients of bone marrow transplants. Ann Intern Med 1987;107:648–56.
12. Crawford SW, Fisher L. Predictive value of pulmonary function tests before marrow transplantation. Chest 1992; 101:1257–64.
13. Ghalie R, Szidon JP, Thompson L, et al. Evaluation of pulmonary complications after bone marrow transplantation: the role of pretransplant pulmonary function tests. Bone Marrow Transplant 1992;10:359–65.
14. Ho VT, Weller E, Lee SJ, et al. Prognostic factors for early severe pulmonary complications after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2001;7:223–9.
15. Horak DA, Schmidt GM, Zaia JA, et al. Pretransplant pulmonary function predicts cytomegalovirus-associated interstitial pneumonia following bone marrow transplantation. Chest 1992;102:1484–90.
16. Ramirez-Sarmiento A, Orozco-Levi M, Walter EC, et al. Influence of pretransplantation restrictive lung disease on allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation outcomes. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2010;16:199–206.
17. White AC, Terrin N, Miller KB, Ryan HF. Impaired respiratory and skeletal muscle strength in patients prior to hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Chest 2005;128145–52.
18. Afessa B. Pretransplant pulmonary evaluation of the blood and marrow transplant recipient. Chest 2005;128:8–10.
19. Parimon T, Madtes DK, Au DH, et al. Pretransplant lung function, respiratory failure, and mortality after stem cell transplantation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005;172:384–90.
20. Pavletic SZ, Martin P, Lee SJ, et al. Measuring therapeutic response in chronic graft-versus-host disease: National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on Criteria for Clinical Trials in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: IV. Response Criteria Working Group report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006;12:252–66.
21. Parimon T, Au DH, Martin PJ, Chien JW. A risk score for mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:407–14.
22. Au BK, Gooley TA, Armand P, et al. Reevaluation of the pretransplant assessment of mortality score after allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2015;21:848–54.
23. Sorror ML, Maris MB, Storb R, et al. Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT)-specific comorbidity index: a new tool for risk assessment before allogeneic HCT. Blood 2005;106:2912–9.
24. Chien JW, Sullivan KM. Carbon monoxide diffusion capacity: how low can you go for hematopoietic cell transplantation eligibility? Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15: 447–53.
25. Coffey DG, Pollyea DA, Myint H, et al. Adjusting DLCO for Hb and its effects on the Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation-specific Comorbidity Index. Bone Marrow Transplant 2013;48:1253–6.
26. Kasow KA, Krueger J, Srivastava DK, et al. Clinical utility of computed tomography screening of chest, abdomen, and sinuses before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: the St. Jude experience. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15:490–5.
27. Hamadani M, Craig M, Awan FT, Devine SM. How we approach patient evaluation for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2010;45: 1259–68.
28. Savani BN, Montero A, Wu C, et al. Prediction and prevention of transplant-related mortality from pulmonary causes after total body irradiation and allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2005;11:223–30.
29. Ehlers SL, Gastineau DA, Patten CA, et al. The impact of smoking on outcomes among patients undergoing hematopoietic SCT for the treatment of acute leukemia. Bone Marrow Transplant 2011;46:285–90.
30. Marks DI, Ballen K, Logan BR, et al. The effect of smoking on allogeneic transplant outcomes. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15:1277–87.
31. Tran BT, Halperin A, Chien JW. Cigarette smoking and outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2011;17:1004–11.
32. Lucena CM, Torres A, Rovira M, et al. Pulmonary complications in hematopoietic SCT: a prospective study. Bone Marrow Transplant 2014;49:1293–9.
33. Chi AK, Soubani AO, White AC, Miller KB. An update on pulmonary complications of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Chest 2013;144:1913–22.
34. Dunagan DP, Baker AM, Hurd DD, Haponik EF. Bronchoscopic evaluation of pulmonary infiltrates following bone marrow transplantation. Chest 1997;111:135–41.
35. Naeem N, Reed MD, Creger RJ, et al. Transfer of the hematopoietic stem cell transplant patient to the intensive care unit: does it really matter? Bone Marrow Transplant 2006;37:119–33.
36. Afessa B, Tefferi A, Hoagland HC, et al. Outcome of recipients of bone marrow transplants who require intensive care unit support. Mayo Clin Proc 1992;67:117–22.
37. Parody R, Martino R, de la Camara R, et al. Fungal and viral infections after allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation from unrelated donors in adults: improving outcomes over time. Bone Marrow Transplant 2015;50:274–81.
38. Orasch C, Weisser M, Mertz D, et al. Comparison of infectious complications during induction/consolidation chemotherapy versus allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2010;45:521–6.
39. Aguilar-Guisado M, Jimenez-Jambrina M, Espigado I, et al. Pneumonia in allogeneic stem cell transplantation recipients: a multicenter prospective study. Clin Transplant 2011;25:E629–38.
40. Palacios G, Hornig M, Cisterna D, et al. Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfection is correlated with the severity of H1N1 pandemic influenza. PLoS One 2009;4:e8540.
41. Hynicka LM, Ensor CR. Prophylaxis and treatment of respiratory syncytial virus in adult immunocompromised patients. Ann Pharmacother 2012;46:558–66.
42. Shah JN, Chemaly RF. Management of RSV infections in adult recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood 2011;2755–63.
43. Marr KA, Bowden RA. Fungal infections in patients undergoing blood and marrow transplantation. Transpl Infect Dis 1999;1:237–46.
44. Wald A, Leisenring W, van Burik JA, Bowden RA. Epidemiology of Aspergillus infections in a large cohort of patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation. J Infect Dis 1997;175:1459–66.
45. Ascioglu S, Rex JH, de Pauw B, et al. Defining opportunistic invasive fungal infections in immunocompromised patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplants: an international consensus. Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:7–14.
46. Fisher CE, Stevens AM, Leisenring W, et al. Independent contribution of bronchoalveolar lavage and serum galactomannan in the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Transpl Infect Dis 2014;16:505–10.
47. Kojima R, Tateishi U, Kami M, et al. Chest computed tomography of late invasive aspergillosis after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2005;11:506–11.
48. Salmeron G, Porcher R, Bergeron A, et al. Persistent poor long-term prognosis of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients surviving invasive aspergillosis. Haematologica 2012;97:1357–63.
49. McNulty JS. Rhinocerebral mucormycosis: predisposing factors. Laryngoscope 1982;92(10 Pt 1):1140.
50. Walsh TJ, Gamaletsou MN, McGinnis MR, et al. Early clinical and laboratory diagnosis of invasive pulmonary, extrapulmonary, and disseminated mucormycosis (zygomycosis). Clin Infect Dis 2012;54 Suppl 1:S55–60.
51. Klingspor L, Saaedi B, Ljungman P, Szakos A. Epidemiology and outcomes of patients with invasive mould infections: a retrospective observational study from a single centre (2005-2009). Mycoses 2015;58:470–7.
52. Danion F, Aguilar C, Catherinot E, et al. Mucormycosis: new developments in a persistently devastating infection. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2015;36:692–70.
53. Rano A, Agusti C, Jimenez P, et al. Pulmonary infiltrates in non-HIV immunocompromised patients: a diagnostic approach using non-invasive and bronchoscopic procedures. Thorax 2001;56:379–87.
54. Azoulay E, Mokart D, Rabbat A, et al. Diagnostic bronchoscopy in hematology and oncology patients with acute respiratory failure: prospective multicenter data. Crit Care Med 2008;36:100–7.
55. Jain P, Sandur S, Meli Y, et al. Role of flexible bronchoscopy in immunocompromised patients with lung infiltrates. Chest 2004;125:712–22.
56. Rano A, Agusti C, Benito N, et al. Prognostic factors of non-HIV immunocompromised patients with pulmonary infiltrates. Chest 2002;122:253–61.
57. Shannon VR, Andersson BS, Lei X, et al. Utility of early versus late fiberoptic bronchoscopy in the evaluation of new pulmonary infiltrates following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2010;45:647–55.
58. Patel NR, Lee PS, Kim JH, et al. The influence of diagnostic bronchoscopy on clinical outcomes comparing adult autologous and allogeneic bone marrow transplant patients. Chest 2005;127:1388–96.
59. Chellapandian D, Lehrnbecher T, Phillips B, et al. Bronchoalveolar lavage and lung biopsy in patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:501–9.
60. Carr IM, Koegelenberg CF, von Groote-Bidlingmaier F, et al. Blood loss during flexible bronchoscopy: a prospective observational study. Respiration 2012;84:312–8.
61. Miyamoto M, Onizuka M, Machida S, et al. ACE deletion polymorphism is associated with a high risk of non-infectious pulmonary complications after stem cell transplantation. Int J Hematol 2014;99:175–83.
62. Capizzi SA, Kumar S, Huneke NE, et al. Peri-engraftment respiratory distress syndrome during autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001;27:1299–303.
63. Spitzer TR. Engraftment syndrome following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001;27:893–8.
64. Wanko SO, Broadwater G, Folz RJ, Chao NJ. Diffuse alveolar hemorrhage: retrospective review of clinical outcome in allogeneic transplant recipients treated with aminocaproic acid. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006;12:949–53.
65. Metcalf JP, Rennard SI, Reed EC, et al. Corticosteroids as adjunctive therapy for diffuse alveolar hemorrhage associated with bone marrow transplantation. University of Nebraska Medical Center Bone Marrow Transplant Group. Am J Med 1994;96:327–34.
66. Rathi NK, Tanner AR, Dinh A, et al. Low-, medium- and high-dose steroids with or without aminocaproic acid in adult hematopoietic SCT patients with diffuse alveolar hemorrhage. Bone Marrow Transplant 2015;50:420–6.
67. Afessa B, Tefferi A, Litzow MR, Peters SG. Outcome of diffuse alveolar hemorrhage in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;166:1364–8.
68. Panoskaltsis-Mortari A, Griese M, Madtes DK, et al. An official American Thoracic Society research statement: noninfectious lung injury after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: idiopathic pneumonia syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011;183:1262–79.
69. Clark JG, Hansen JA, Hertz MI, Pet al. NHLBI workshop summary. Idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after bone marrow transplantation. Am Rev Resp Dis 1993;147:1601–6.
70. Vande Vusse LK, Madtes DK. Early onset noninfectious pulmonary syndromes after hematopoietic cell transplantation. Clin Chest Med 2017;38:233–48.
71. Fukuda T, Hackman RC, Guthrie KA, et al. Risks and outcomes of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after nonmyeloablative and conventional conditioning regimens for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood 2003;102:2777–85.
72. Englund JA, Boeckh M, Kuypers J, et al. Brief communication: fatal human metapneumovirus infection in stem-cell transplant recipients. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:344–9.
73. Seo S, Renaud C, Kuypers JM, et al. Idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after hematopoietic cell transplantation: evidence of occult infectious etiologies. Blood 2015;125:3789–97.
74. Nakane T, Nakamae H, Kamoi H, et al. Prognostic value of serum surfactant protein D level prior to transplant for the development of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome and idiopathic pneumonia syndrome following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2008;42:43–9.
75. Gilbert CR, Lerner A, Baram M, Awsare BK. Utility of flexible bronchoscopy in the evaluation of pulmonary infiltrates in the hematopoietic stem cell transplant population—a single center fourteen year experience. Arch Bronconeumol 2013;49:189–95.
76. Yanik GA, Horowitz MM, Weisdorf DJ, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor: enbrel (etanercept) for the treatment of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation: blood and marrow transplant clinical trials network protocol. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2014;20:858–64.
77. Levine JE, Paczesny S, Mineishi S, et al. Etanercept plus methylprednisolone as initial therapy for acute graft-versus-host disease. Blood 2008;111:2470–5.
78. Yanik GA, Grupp SA, Pulsipher MA, et al. TNF-receptor inhibitor therapy for the treatment of children with idiopathic pneumonia syndrome. A joint Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplant Consortium and Children’s Oncology Group Study (ASCT0521). Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2015;21:67–73.
79. Thompson J, Yin Z, D’Souza A, et al. Etanercept and corticosteroid therapy for the treatment of late-onset idiopathic pneumonia syndrome. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant J 2017; 23:1955–60.
Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is widely used in the economically developed world to treat a variety of hematologic malignancies as well as nonmalignant diseases and solid tumors. An estimated 17,900 HSCTs were performed in 2011, and survival rates continue to increase.1 Pulmonary complications post HSCT are common, with rates ranging from 40% to 60%, and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality.2
Clinical diagnosis of pulmonary complications in the HSCT population has been aided by a previously well-defined chronology of the most common diseases.3 Historically, early pulmonary complications were defined as pulmonary complications occurring within 100 days of HSCT (corresponding to the acute graft-versus-host disease [GVHD] period). Late pulmonary complications are those that occur thereafter. This timeline, however, is now more variable given the increasing indications for HSCT, the use of reduced-intensity conditioning strategies, and varied individual immune reconstitution. This article discusses the management of early post-HSCT pulmonary complications; late post-HSCT pulmonary complications will be discussed in a separate follow-up article.
Transplant Basics
The development of pulmonary complications is affected by many factors associated with the transplant. Autologous transplantation involves the collection of a patient’s own stem cells, appropriate storage and processing, and re-implantation after induction therapy. During induction therapy, the patient undergoes high-dose chemotherapy or radiation therapy that ablates the bone marrow. The stem cells are then transfused back into the patient to repopulate the bone marrow. Allogeneic transplants involve the collection of stem cells from a donor. Donors are matched as closely as possible to the recipient’s histocompatibility antigen (HLA) haplotypes to prevent graft failure and rejection. The donor can be related or unrelated to the recipient. If there is not a possibility of a related match (from a sibling), then a national search is undertaken to look for a match through the National Marrow Donor Program. There are fewer transplant reactions and occurrences of GVHD if the major HLAs of the donor and recipient match. Table 1 reviews basic definitions pertaining to HSCT.
How the cells for transplantation are obtained is also an important factor in the rate of complications. There are 3 main sources: peripheral blood, bone marrow, and umbilical cord. Peripheral stem cell harvesting involves exposing the donor to granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (gCSF), which increases peripheral circulation of stem cells. These cells are then collected and infused into the recipient after the recipient has completed an induction regimen involving chemotherapy and/or radiation, depending on the protocol. This procedure is called peripheral blood stem cell transplant (PBSCT). Stem cells can also be directly harvested from bone marrow cells, which are collected from repeated aspiration of bone marrow from the posterior iliac crest.4 This technique is most common in children, whereas in adults peripheral blood stem cells are the most common source. Overall mortality does not differ based on the source of the stem cells. It is postulated that GVHD may be more common in patients undergoing PBSCT, but the graft failure rate may be lower.5
The third option is umbilical cord blood (UCB) as the source of stem cells. This involves the collection of umbilical cord blood that is prepared and frozen after birth. It has a smaller volume of cells, and although fewer cells are needed when using UCB, 2 separate donors may be required for a single adult recipient. The engraftment of the stem cells is slower and infections in the post-transplant period are more common. Prior reports indicate GVHD rates may be lower.4 While the use of UCB is not common in adults, the incidence has doubled over the past decade, increasing from 3% to 6%.
The conditioning regimen can influence pulmonary complications. Traditionally, an ablative transplant involves high-dose chemotherapy or radiation to eradicate the recipient’s bone marrow. This regimen can lead to many complications, especially in the immediate post-transplant period. In the past 10 years, there has been increasing interest in non-myeloablative, or reduced-intensity, conditioning transplants.6 These “mini transplants” involve smaller doses of chemotherapy or radiation, which do not totally eradicate the bone marrow; after the transplant a degree of chimerism develops where the donor and recipient stem cells coexist. The medications in the preparative regimen also should be considered because they can affect pulmonary complications after transplant. Certain chemotherapeutic agents such as carmustine, bleomycin, and many others can lead to acute and chronic presentations of pulmonary diseases such as hypersensitivity pneumonitis, pulmonary fibrosis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and abnormal pulmonary function testing.
After the HSCT, GVHD can develop in more than 50% of allogeneic recipients.3 The incidence of GVHD has been reported to be increasing over the past 12 years.It is divided into acute GVHD (which traditionally happens in the first 100 days after transplant) and chronic GVHD (after day 100). This calendar-day–based system has been augmented based on a 2006 National Institutes of Health working group report emphasizing the importance of organ-specific features of chronic GVHD in the clinical presentation of GVHD.7 Histologic changes in chronic organ GVHD tend to include more fibrotic features, whereas in acute GVHD more inflammatory changes are seen. The NIH working group report also stressed the importance of obtaining a biopsy specimen for histopathologic review and interdisciplinary collaboration to arrive at a consensus diagnosis, and noted the limitations of using histologic changes as the sole determinant of a “gold standard” diagnosis.7 GVHD can directly predispose patients to pulmonary GVHD and indirectly predispose them to infectious complications because the mainstay of therapy for GVHD is increased immunosuppression.
Pretransplant Evaluation
Case Patient 1
A 56-year-old man is diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) after presenting with signs and symptoms consistent with pancytopenia. He has a past medical history of chronic sinus congestion, arthritis, depression, chronic pain, and carpal tunnel surgery. He is employed as an oilfield worker and has a 40-pack-year smoking history, but he recently cut back to half a pack per day. He is being evaluated for allogeneic transplant with his brother as the donor and the planned conditioning regimen is total body irradiation (TBI), thiotepa, cyclophosphamide, and antithymocyte globulin with T-cell depletion. Routine pretransplant pulmonary function testing (PFT) reveals a restrictive pattern and he is sent for pretransplant pulmonary evaluation.
Physical exam reveals a chronically ill appearing man. He is afebrile, the respiratory rate is 16 breaths/min, blood pressure is 145/88 mm Hg, heart rate is 92 beats/min, and oxygen saturation is 95%. He is in no distress. Auscultation of the chest reveals slightly diminished breath sounds bilaterally but is clear and without wheezes, rhonchi, or rales. Heart exam shows regular rate and rhythm without murmurs, rubs, or gallops. Extremities reveal no edema or rashes. Otherwise, the remainder of the exam is normal. The patient’s PFT results are shown in Table 2.
- What aspects of this patient’s history put him at risk for pulmonary complications after transplantation?
Risk Factors for Pulmonary Complications
Predicting who is at risk for pulmonary complications is difficult. Complications are generally divided into infectious and noninfectious categories. Regardless of category, allogeneic HSCT recipients are at increased risk compared with autologous recipients, but even in autologous transplants, more than 25% of patients will develop pulmonary complications in the first year.8 Prior to transplant, patients undergo full PFT. Early on, many studies attempted to show relationships between various factors and post-transplant pulmonary complications. Factors that were implicated were forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (D
Another sometimes overlooked risk before transplantation is restrictive lung disease. One study showed a twofold increase in respiratory failure and mortality if there was pretransplant restriction based on TLC < 80%.16
An interesting study by one group in pretransplant evaluation found decreased muscle strength by maximal inspiratory muscle strength (PImax), maximal expiratory muscle strength (PEmax), dominant hand grip strength, and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance prior to allogeneic transplant, but did not find a relationship between these variables and mortality.17 While this study had a small sample size, these findings likely deserve continued investigation.18
- What methods are used to calculate risk for complications?
Risk Scoring Systems
Several pretransplantation risk scores have been developed. In a study that looked at more than 2500 allogeneic transplants, Parimon et al showed that risk of mortality and respiratory failure could be estimated prior to transplant using a scoring system—the Lung Function Score (LFS)—that combines the FEV1 and D
The Pretransplantation Assessment of Mortality score, initially developed in 2006, predicts mortality within the first 2 years after HSCT based on 8 clinical factors: disease risk, age at transplant, donor type, conditioning regimen, and markers of organ function (percentage of predicted FEV1, percentage of predicted D
- What other preoperative testing or interventions should be considered in this patient?
Since there is a high risk of infectious complications after transplant, the question of whether pretransplantation patients should undergo screening imaging may arise. There is no evidence that routine chest computed tomography (CT) reduces the risk of infectious complications after transplantation.26 An area that may be insufficiently addressed in the pretransplantation evaluation is smoking cessation counseling.27 Studies have shown an elevated risk of mortality in smokers.28-30 Others have found a higher incidence of respiratory failure but not an increased mortality.31 Overall, with the good rates of smoking cessation that can be accomplished, smokers should be counseled to quit before transplantation.
In summary, patients should undergo full PFTs prior to transplantation to help stratify risk for pulmonary complications and mortality and to establish a clinical baseline. The LFS (using FEV1 and D
Case Patient 1 Conclusion
The patient undergoes transplantation due to his lack of other treatment options. Evaluation prior to transplant, however, shows that he is at high risk for pulmonary complications. He has a LFS of 7 prior to transplant (using the D
Early Infectious Pulmonary Complications
Case Patient 2
A 27-year-old man with a medical history significant for AML and allogeneic HSCT presents with cough productive of a small amount of clear to white sputum, dyspnea on exertion, and fevers for 1 week. He also has mild nausea and a decrease in appetite. He underwent HSCT 2.5 months prior to admission, which was a matched unrelated bone marrow transplant with TBI and cyclophosphamide conditioning. His past medical history is significant only for exercise-induced asthma for which he takes a rescue inhaler infrequently prior to transplantation. His pretransplant PFTs showed normal spirometry with an FEV1 of 106% of predicted and D
Physical exam is notable for fever of 101.0°F, heart rate 80 beats/min, respiratory rate 16 breaths/ min, and blood pressure 142/78 mm Hg; an admission oxygen saturation is 93% on room air. Lungs show bibasilar crackles and the remainder of the exam is normal. Laboratory testing shows a white blood cell count of 2400 cells/μL, hemoglobin 7.6 g/dL, and platelet count 66 × 103/μL. Creatinine is 1.0 mg/dL. Chest radiograph shows ill-defined bilateral lower-lobe infiltrates. CT scans are shown in the Figure.
- For which infectious complications is this patient most at risk?
Pneumonia
A prospective trial in the HSCT population reported a pneumonia incidence rate of 68%, and pneumonia is more common in allogeneic HSCT with prolonged immunosuppressive therapy.32 Development of pneumonia within 100 days of transplant directly correlates with nonrelapsed mortality.33 Early detection is key, and bronchoscopy within the first 5 days of symptoms has been shown to change therapy in approximately 40% of cases but has not been shown to affect mortality.34 The clinical presentation of pneumonia in the HSCT population can be variable because of the presence of neutropenia and profound immunosuppression. Traditionally accepted diagnostic criteria of fevers, sputum production, and new infiltrates should be used with caution, and an appropriately high index of suspicion should be maintained. Progression to respiratory failure, regardless of causative organism of infection, portends a poor prognosis, with mortality rates estimated at 70% to 90%.35,36 Several transplant-specific factors may affect early infections. For instance, UCB transplants have been found to have a higher incidence of invasive aspergillosis and cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections but without higher mortality attributed to the infections.37
Bacterial Pneumonia
Bacterial pneumonia accounts for 20% to 50% of pneumonia cases in HSCT recipients.38 Gram-negative organisms, specifically Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli, were reported to be the most common pathologic bacteria in recent prospective trials, whereas previous retrospective trials showed that common community-acquired organisms were the most common cause of pneumonia in HSCT recipients.32,39 This underscores the importance of being aware of the clinical prevalence of microorganisms and local antibiograms, along with associated institutional susceptibility profiles. Initiation of immediate empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics is essential when bacterial pneumonia is suspected.
Viral Pneumonia
The prevalence of viral pneumonia in stem cell transplant recipients is estimated at 28%,32 with most cases being caused by community viral pathogens such as rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza A and B, and parainfluenza.39 The prevention, prophylaxis, and early treatment of viral pneumonias, specifically CMV infection, have decreased the mortality associated with early pneumonia after HSCT. Co-infection with bacterial organisms must be considered and has been associated with increased mortality in the intensive care unit setting.40
Supportive treatment with rhinovirus infection is sufficient as the disease is usually self-limited in immunocompromised patients. In contrast, infection with RSV in the lower respiratory tract is associated with increased mortality in prior reports, and recent studies suggest that further exploration of prophylaxis strategies is warranted.41 Treatment with ribavirin remains the backbone of therapy, but drug toxicity continues to limit its use. The addition of immunomodulators such as RSV immune globulin or palivizumab to ribavirin remains controversial, but a retrospective review suggests that early treatment may prevent progression to lower respiratory tract infection and lead to improved mortality.42 Infection with influenza A/B must be considered during influenza season. Treatment with oseltamivir may shorten the duration of disease when influenza A/B or parainfluenza are detected. Reactivation of latent herpes simplex virus during the pre-engraftment phase should also be considered. Treatment is similar to that in nonimmunocompromised hosts. When CMV pneumonia is suspected, careful history regarding compliance with prophylactic antivirals and CMV status of both the recipient and donor are key. A presumptive diagnosis can be made with the presence of appropriate clinical scenario, supportive radiographic images showing areas of ground-glass opacification or consolidation, and positive CMV polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. Visualization of inclusion bodies on lung biopsy tissue remains the gold standard for diagnosis. Treatment consists of CMV immunoglobulin and ganciclovir.
Fungal Pneumonia
Early fungal pneumonias have been associated with increased mortality in the HSCT population.43 Clinical suspicion should remain high and compliance with antifungal prophylaxis should be questioned thoroughly. Invasive aspergillosis (IA) remains the most common fungal infection. A bimodal distribution of onset of infection peaking on day 16 and again on day 96 has been described in the literature.44 Patients often present with classic pneumonia symptoms, but these may be accompanied by hemoptysis. Proven IA diagnosis requires visualization of fungal forms from biopsy or needle aspiration or a positive culture obtained in a sterile fashion.45 Most clinical data comes from experience with probable and possible diagnosis of IA. Bronchoalveolar lavage with testing with Aspergillus galactomannan assay has been shown to be clinically useful in establishing the clinical diagnosis in the HSCT population.46 Classic air-crescent findings on chest CT are helpful in establishing a possible diagnosis, but retrospective analysis reveals CT findings such as focal infiltrates and pulmonary nodular patterns are more common.47 First-line treatment with voriconazole has been shown to decrease short-term mortality attributable to IA but has not had an effect on long-term, all-cause mortality.48 Surgical resection is reserved for patients with refractory disease or patients presenting with massive hemoptysis.
Mucormycosis is an emerging disease with ever increasing prevalence in the HSCT population, reflecting the improved prophylaxis and treatment of IA. Initial clinical presentation is similar to IA, most commonly affecting the lung, although craniofacial involvement is classic for mucormycosis, especially in HSCT patients with diabetes.49Mucor infections can present with massive hemoptysis due to tissue invasion and disregard for tissue and fascial planes. Diagnosis of mucormycosis is associated with as much as a six-fold increase in risk for death. Diagnosis requires identification of the organism by examination or culture and biopsy is often necessary.50,51 Amphotericin B remains first-line therapy as mucormycosis is resistant to azole antifungals, with higher doses recommended for cerebral involvement.52
Candida pulmonary infections during the early HSCT period are becoming increasingly rare due to widespread use of fluconazole prophylaxis and early treatment of mucosal involvement during neutropenia. Endemic fungal infections such as blastomycosis, coccidioidomycosis, and histoplasmosis should be considered in patients inhabiting specific geographic areas or with recent travel to these areas.
- What test should be performed to evaluate for infectious causes of pneumonia?
Role of Flexible Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy
The utility of flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) in immune-compromised patients for the evaluation of pulmonary infiltrates is a frequently debated topic. Current studies suggest a diagnosis can be made in approximately 80% of cases in the immune-compromised population.32,53 Noninvasive testing such as urine and serum antigens, sputum cultures, Aspergillus galactomannan assays, viral nasal swabs, and PCR studies often lead to a diagnosis in appropriate clinical scenarios. Conservative management would dictate the use of noninvasive testing whenever possible, and randomized controlled trials have shown noninvasive testing to be noninferior to FOB in preventing need for mechanical ventilation, with no difference in overall mortality.54 FOB has been shown to be most useful in establishing a diagnosis when an infectious etiology is suspected.55 In multivariate analysis, a delay in the identification of the etiology of pulmonary infiltrate was associated with increased mortality.56 Additionally, early FOB was found to be superior to late FOB in revealing a diagnosis. 32,57 Despite its ability to detect the cause of pulmonary disease, direct antibiotic therapy, and possibly change therapy, FOB with diagnostic maneuvers has not been shown to affect mortality.58 In a large case series, FOB with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) revealed a diagnosis in approximately 30% to 50% of cases. The addition of transbronchial biopsy did not improve diagnostic utility.58 More recent studies have confirmed that the addition of transbronchial biopsy does not add to diagnostic yield and is associated with increased adverse events.59 The appropriate use of advanced techniques such as endobronchial ultrasound–guided transbronchial needle aspirations, endobronchial biopsy, and CT-guided navigational bronchoscopy has not been established and should be considered on a case-by-case basis. In summary, routine early BAL is the diagnostic test of choice, especially when infectious pulmonary complications are suspected.
Contraindications for FOB in this population mirror those in the general population. These include acute severe hypoxemic respiratory failure, myocardial ischemia or acute coronary syndrome within 2 weeks of procedure, severe thrombocytopenia, and inability to provide or obtain informed consent from patient or health care power of attorney. Coagulopathy and thrombocytopenia are common comorbid conditions in the HSCT population. A platelet count of < 20 × 103/µL has generally been used as a cut-off for routine FOB with BAL.60 Risks of the procedures should be discussed clearly with the patient, but simple FOB for airway evaluation and BAL is generally well tolerated even under these conditions.
Early Nonifectious Pulmonary Complications
Case Patient 2 Continued
Bronchoscopy with BAL performed the day after admission is unremarkable and stains and cultures are negative for viral, bacterial, and fungal organisms. The patient is initially started on broad-spectrum antibiotics, but his oxygenation continues to worsen to the point that he is placed on noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. He is started empirically on amphotericin B and eventually is intubated. VATS lung biopsy is ultimately performed and pathology is consistent with diffuse alveolar damage.
- Based on these biopsy findings, what is the diagnosis?
Based on the pathology consistent with diffuse alveolar damage, a diagnosis of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome (IPS) is made.
- What noninfectious pulmonary complications occur in the early post-transplant period?
The overall incidence of noninfectious pulmonary complications after HSCT is generally estimated at 20% to 30%.32 Acute pulmonary edema is a common very early noninfectious pulmonary complication and clinically the most straightforward to treat. Three distinct clinical syndromes—peri-engraftment respiratory distress syndrome (PERDS), diffuse alveolar hemorrhage (DAH), and IPS—comprise the remainder of the pertinent early noninfectious complications. Clinical presentation differs based upon the disease entity. Recent studies have evaluated the role of angiotensin-converting enzyme polymorphisms as a predictive marker for risk of developing early noninfectious pulmonary complications.61
Peri-Engraftment Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PERDS is a clinical syndrome comprising the cardinal features of erythematous rash and fever along with noncardiogenic pulmonary infiltrates and hypoxemia that occur in the peri-engraftment period, defined as recovery of absolute neutrophil count to > 500/μL on 2 consecutive days.62 PERDS occurs in the autologous HSCT population and may be a clinical correlate to early GVHD in the allogeneic HSCT population. It is hypothesized that the pathophysiology underlying PERDS is an autoimmune-related capillary leak caused by pro-inflammatory cytokine release.63 Treatment remains anecdotal and currently consists of supportive care and high-dose corticosteroids. Some have favored limiting the use of gCSF given its role in stimulating rapid white blood cell recovery.33 Prognosis is favorable, but progression to fulminant respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation portends a poor prognosis.
Diffuse Alveolar Hemorrhage
DAH is clinical syndrome consisting of diffuse alveolar infiltrates on pulmonary imaging combined with progressively bloodier return per aliquot during BAL in 3 different subsegments or more than 20% hemosiderin-laden macrophages on BAL fluid evaluation. Classically, DAH is defined in the absence of pulmonary infection or cardiac dysfunction. The pathophysiology is thought to be related to inflammation of pulmonary vasculature within the alveolar walls leading to alveolitis. Although no prospective trials exist, early use of high-dose corticosteroid therapy is thought to improve outcomes;64,65 a recent study, however, showed low-dose steroids may be associated with the lowest mortality.66 Mortality is directly linked to the presence of superimposed infection, need for mechanical ventilation, late onset, and development of multiorgan failure.67
Idiopathic Pneumonia Syndrome
IPS is a complex clinical syndrome whose pathology is felt to stem from a variety of possible lung insults such as direct myeloablative drug toxicity, occult pulmonary infection, or cytokine-driven inflammation. The ATS published an article further subcategorizing IPS as different clinical entities based upon whether the primary insult involves the vascular endothelium, interstitial tissue, and airway tissue, truly idiopathic, or unclassified.68 In clinical practice, IPS is defined as widespread alveolar injury in the absence of evidence of renal failure, heart failure, and excessive fluid resuscitation. In addition, negative testing for a variety of bacterial, viral, and fungal causes is also necessary.69 Clinical syndromes included within the IPS definition are ARDS, acute interstitial pneumonia, DAH, cryptogenic organizing pneumonia, and BOS.70 Risk factors for developing IPS include TBI, older age of recipient, acute GVHD, and underlying diagnosis of AML or myelodysplastic syndrome.12 In addition, it has been shown that risk for developing IPS is lower in patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT who receive non-myeloablative conditioning regimens.71 The pathologic finding in IPS is diffuse alveolar damage. A 2006 study in which investigators reviewed BAL samples from patients with IPS found that 3% of the patients had PCR evidence of human metapneumovirus infection, and a study in 2015 found PCR evidence of infection in 53% of BAL samples from patients diagnosed with IPS.72,73 This fuels the debate on whether IPS is truly an infection-driven process where the source of infection, pulmonary or otherwise, simply escapes detection. Various surfactant proteins, which play a role in decreasing surface tension within the alveolar interface and function as mediators within the innate immunity of the lung, have been studied in regard to development of IPS. Small retrospective studies have shown a trend toward lower pre-transplant serum protein surfactant D and the development of IPS.74
The diagnosis of IPS does not require pathologic diagnosis in most circumstances. The correct clinical findings in association with a negative infectious workup lead to a presumptive diagnosis of IPS. The extent of the infectious workup that must be completed to adequately rule out infection is often a difficult clinical question. Recent recommendations include BAL fluid evaluation for routine bacterial cultures, appropriate viral culture, and consideration of PCR testing to evaluate for Mycoplasma, Chlamydia, and Aspergillus antigens.75 Transbronchial biopsy continues to appear in recommendations, but is not routinely performed and should be completed as the patient’s clinical status permits.8,68 Table 3 reviews basic features of early noninfectious pulmonary complications.
Treatment of IPS centers around moderate to high doses of corticosteroids. Based on IPS experimental modes, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α has been implicated as an important mediator. Unfortunately, several studies evaluating etanercept have produced conflicting results, and this agent’s clinical effects on morbidity and mortality remain in question.76
- What treatment should be offered to the patient with diffuse alveolar damage on biopsy?
Treatment consists of supportive care and empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics with consideration of high-dose corticosteroids. Based upon early studies in murine models implicating TNF, pilot studies were performed evaluating etanercept as a possible safe and effective addition to high-dose systemic corticosteroids.77 Although these results were promising, data from a truncated randomized control clinical trial failed to show improvement in patient response in the adult population.76 More recent data from the same author suggests that pediatric populations with IPS are, however, responsive to etanercept and high-dose corticosteroid therapy.78 When IPS develops as a late complication, treatment with high-dose corticosteroids (2 mg/kg/day) and etanercept (0.4 mg/kg twice weekly) has been shown to improve 2-year survival.79
Case Patient 2 Conclusion
The patient is started on steroids and makes a speedy recovery. He is successfully extubated 5 days later.
Conclusion
Careful pretransplant evaluation, including a full set of pulmonary function tests, can help predict a patient’s risk for pulmonary complications after transplant, allowing risk factor modification strategies to be implemented prior to transplant, including smoking cessation. It also helps identify patients at high risk for complications who will require closer monitoring after transplantation. Early posttransplant complications include infectious and noninfectious entities. Bacterial, viral, and fungal pneumonias are in the differential of infectious pneumonia, and bronchoscopy can be helpful in establishing a diagnosis. A common, important noninfectious cause of early pulmonary complications is IPS, which is treated with steroids and sometimes anti-TNF therapy.
Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is widely used in the economically developed world to treat a variety of hematologic malignancies as well as nonmalignant diseases and solid tumors. An estimated 17,900 HSCTs were performed in 2011, and survival rates continue to increase.1 Pulmonary complications post HSCT are common, with rates ranging from 40% to 60%, and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality.2
Clinical diagnosis of pulmonary complications in the HSCT population has been aided by a previously well-defined chronology of the most common diseases.3 Historically, early pulmonary complications were defined as pulmonary complications occurring within 100 days of HSCT (corresponding to the acute graft-versus-host disease [GVHD] period). Late pulmonary complications are those that occur thereafter. This timeline, however, is now more variable given the increasing indications for HSCT, the use of reduced-intensity conditioning strategies, and varied individual immune reconstitution. This article discusses the management of early post-HSCT pulmonary complications; late post-HSCT pulmonary complications will be discussed in a separate follow-up article.
Transplant Basics
The development of pulmonary complications is affected by many factors associated with the transplant. Autologous transplantation involves the collection of a patient’s own stem cells, appropriate storage and processing, and re-implantation after induction therapy. During induction therapy, the patient undergoes high-dose chemotherapy or radiation therapy that ablates the bone marrow. The stem cells are then transfused back into the patient to repopulate the bone marrow. Allogeneic transplants involve the collection of stem cells from a donor. Donors are matched as closely as possible to the recipient’s histocompatibility antigen (HLA) haplotypes to prevent graft failure and rejection. The donor can be related or unrelated to the recipient. If there is not a possibility of a related match (from a sibling), then a national search is undertaken to look for a match through the National Marrow Donor Program. There are fewer transplant reactions and occurrences of GVHD if the major HLAs of the donor and recipient match. Table 1 reviews basic definitions pertaining to HSCT.
How the cells for transplantation are obtained is also an important factor in the rate of complications. There are 3 main sources: peripheral blood, bone marrow, and umbilical cord. Peripheral stem cell harvesting involves exposing the donor to granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (gCSF), which increases peripheral circulation of stem cells. These cells are then collected and infused into the recipient after the recipient has completed an induction regimen involving chemotherapy and/or radiation, depending on the protocol. This procedure is called peripheral blood stem cell transplant (PBSCT). Stem cells can also be directly harvested from bone marrow cells, which are collected from repeated aspiration of bone marrow from the posterior iliac crest.4 This technique is most common in children, whereas in adults peripheral blood stem cells are the most common source. Overall mortality does not differ based on the source of the stem cells. It is postulated that GVHD may be more common in patients undergoing PBSCT, but the graft failure rate may be lower.5
The third option is umbilical cord blood (UCB) as the source of stem cells. This involves the collection of umbilical cord blood that is prepared and frozen after birth. It has a smaller volume of cells, and although fewer cells are needed when using UCB, 2 separate donors may be required for a single adult recipient. The engraftment of the stem cells is slower and infections in the post-transplant period are more common. Prior reports indicate GVHD rates may be lower.4 While the use of UCB is not common in adults, the incidence has doubled over the past decade, increasing from 3% to 6%.
The conditioning regimen can influence pulmonary complications. Traditionally, an ablative transplant involves high-dose chemotherapy or radiation to eradicate the recipient’s bone marrow. This regimen can lead to many complications, especially in the immediate post-transplant period. In the past 10 years, there has been increasing interest in non-myeloablative, or reduced-intensity, conditioning transplants.6 These “mini transplants” involve smaller doses of chemotherapy or radiation, which do not totally eradicate the bone marrow; after the transplant a degree of chimerism develops where the donor and recipient stem cells coexist. The medications in the preparative regimen also should be considered because they can affect pulmonary complications after transplant. Certain chemotherapeutic agents such as carmustine, bleomycin, and many others can lead to acute and chronic presentations of pulmonary diseases such as hypersensitivity pneumonitis, pulmonary fibrosis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and abnormal pulmonary function testing.
After the HSCT, GVHD can develop in more than 50% of allogeneic recipients.3 The incidence of GVHD has been reported to be increasing over the past 12 years.It is divided into acute GVHD (which traditionally happens in the first 100 days after transplant) and chronic GVHD (after day 100). This calendar-day–based system has been augmented based on a 2006 National Institutes of Health working group report emphasizing the importance of organ-specific features of chronic GVHD in the clinical presentation of GVHD.7 Histologic changes in chronic organ GVHD tend to include more fibrotic features, whereas in acute GVHD more inflammatory changes are seen. The NIH working group report also stressed the importance of obtaining a biopsy specimen for histopathologic review and interdisciplinary collaboration to arrive at a consensus diagnosis, and noted the limitations of using histologic changes as the sole determinant of a “gold standard” diagnosis.7 GVHD can directly predispose patients to pulmonary GVHD and indirectly predispose them to infectious complications because the mainstay of therapy for GVHD is increased immunosuppression.
Pretransplant Evaluation
Case Patient 1
A 56-year-old man is diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) after presenting with signs and symptoms consistent with pancytopenia. He has a past medical history of chronic sinus congestion, arthritis, depression, chronic pain, and carpal tunnel surgery. He is employed as an oilfield worker and has a 40-pack-year smoking history, but he recently cut back to half a pack per day. He is being evaluated for allogeneic transplant with his brother as the donor and the planned conditioning regimen is total body irradiation (TBI), thiotepa, cyclophosphamide, and antithymocyte globulin with T-cell depletion. Routine pretransplant pulmonary function testing (PFT) reveals a restrictive pattern and he is sent for pretransplant pulmonary evaluation.
Physical exam reveals a chronically ill appearing man. He is afebrile, the respiratory rate is 16 breaths/min, blood pressure is 145/88 mm Hg, heart rate is 92 beats/min, and oxygen saturation is 95%. He is in no distress. Auscultation of the chest reveals slightly diminished breath sounds bilaterally but is clear and without wheezes, rhonchi, or rales. Heart exam shows regular rate and rhythm without murmurs, rubs, or gallops. Extremities reveal no edema or rashes. Otherwise, the remainder of the exam is normal. The patient’s PFT results are shown in Table 2.
- What aspects of this patient’s history put him at risk for pulmonary complications after transplantation?
Risk Factors for Pulmonary Complications
Predicting who is at risk for pulmonary complications is difficult. Complications are generally divided into infectious and noninfectious categories. Regardless of category, allogeneic HSCT recipients are at increased risk compared with autologous recipients, but even in autologous transplants, more than 25% of patients will develop pulmonary complications in the first year.8 Prior to transplant, patients undergo full PFT. Early on, many studies attempted to show relationships between various factors and post-transplant pulmonary complications. Factors that were implicated were forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (D
Another sometimes overlooked risk before transplantation is restrictive lung disease. One study showed a twofold increase in respiratory failure and mortality if there was pretransplant restriction based on TLC < 80%.16
An interesting study by one group in pretransplant evaluation found decreased muscle strength by maximal inspiratory muscle strength (PImax), maximal expiratory muscle strength (PEmax), dominant hand grip strength, and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance prior to allogeneic transplant, but did not find a relationship between these variables and mortality.17 While this study had a small sample size, these findings likely deserve continued investigation.18
- What methods are used to calculate risk for complications?
Risk Scoring Systems
Several pretransplantation risk scores have been developed. In a study that looked at more than 2500 allogeneic transplants, Parimon et al showed that risk of mortality and respiratory failure could be estimated prior to transplant using a scoring system—the Lung Function Score (LFS)—that combines the FEV1 and D
The Pretransplantation Assessment of Mortality score, initially developed in 2006, predicts mortality within the first 2 years after HSCT based on 8 clinical factors: disease risk, age at transplant, donor type, conditioning regimen, and markers of organ function (percentage of predicted FEV1, percentage of predicted D
- What other preoperative testing or interventions should be considered in this patient?
Since there is a high risk of infectious complications after transplant, the question of whether pretransplantation patients should undergo screening imaging may arise. There is no evidence that routine chest computed tomography (CT) reduces the risk of infectious complications after transplantation.26 An area that may be insufficiently addressed in the pretransplantation evaluation is smoking cessation counseling.27 Studies have shown an elevated risk of mortality in smokers.28-30 Others have found a higher incidence of respiratory failure but not an increased mortality.31 Overall, with the good rates of smoking cessation that can be accomplished, smokers should be counseled to quit before transplantation.
In summary, patients should undergo full PFTs prior to transplantation to help stratify risk for pulmonary complications and mortality and to establish a clinical baseline. The LFS (using FEV1 and D
Case Patient 1 Conclusion
The patient undergoes transplantation due to his lack of other treatment options. Evaluation prior to transplant, however, shows that he is at high risk for pulmonary complications. He has a LFS of 7 prior to transplant (using the D
Early Infectious Pulmonary Complications
Case Patient 2
A 27-year-old man with a medical history significant for AML and allogeneic HSCT presents with cough productive of a small amount of clear to white sputum, dyspnea on exertion, and fevers for 1 week. He also has mild nausea and a decrease in appetite. He underwent HSCT 2.5 months prior to admission, which was a matched unrelated bone marrow transplant with TBI and cyclophosphamide conditioning. His past medical history is significant only for exercise-induced asthma for which he takes a rescue inhaler infrequently prior to transplantation. His pretransplant PFTs showed normal spirometry with an FEV1 of 106% of predicted and D
Physical exam is notable for fever of 101.0°F, heart rate 80 beats/min, respiratory rate 16 breaths/ min, and blood pressure 142/78 mm Hg; an admission oxygen saturation is 93% on room air. Lungs show bibasilar crackles and the remainder of the exam is normal. Laboratory testing shows a white blood cell count of 2400 cells/μL, hemoglobin 7.6 g/dL, and platelet count 66 × 103/μL. Creatinine is 1.0 mg/dL. Chest radiograph shows ill-defined bilateral lower-lobe infiltrates. CT scans are shown in the Figure.
- For which infectious complications is this patient most at risk?
Pneumonia
A prospective trial in the HSCT population reported a pneumonia incidence rate of 68%, and pneumonia is more common in allogeneic HSCT with prolonged immunosuppressive therapy.32 Development of pneumonia within 100 days of transplant directly correlates with nonrelapsed mortality.33 Early detection is key, and bronchoscopy within the first 5 days of symptoms has been shown to change therapy in approximately 40% of cases but has not been shown to affect mortality.34 The clinical presentation of pneumonia in the HSCT population can be variable because of the presence of neutropenia and profound immunosuppression. Traditionally accepted diagnostic criteria of fevers, sputum production, and new infiltrates should be used with caution, and an appropriately high index of suspicion should be maintained. Progression to respiratory failure, regardless of causative organism of infection, portends a poor prognosis, with mortality rates estimated at 70% to 90%.35,36 Several transplant-specific factors may affect early infections. For instance, UCB transplants have been found to have a higher incidence of invasive aspergillosis and cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections but without higher mortality attributed to the infections.37
Bacterial Pneumonia
Bacterial pneumonia accounts for 20% to 50% of pneumonia cases in HSCT recipients.38 Gram-negative organisms, specifically Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli, were reported to be the most common pathologic bacteria in recent prospective trials, whereas previous retrospective trials showed that common community-acquired organisms were the most common cause of pneumonia in HSCT recipients.32,39 This underscores the importance of being aware of the clinical prevalence of microorganisms and local antibiograms, along with associated institutional susceptibility profiles. Initiation of immediate empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics is essential when bacterial pneumonia is suspected.
Viral Pneumonia
The prevalence of viral pneumonia in stem cell transplant recipients is estimated at 28%,32 with most cases being caused by community viral pathogens such as rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza A and B, and parainfluenza.39 The prevention, prophylaxis, and early treatment of viral pneumonias, specifically CMV infection, have decreased the mortality associated with early pneumonia after HSCT. Co-infection with bacterial organisms must be considered and has been associated with increased mortality in the intensive care unit setting.40
Supportive treatment with rhinovirus infection is sufficient as the disease is usually self-limited in immunocompromised patients. In contrast, infection with RSV in the lower respiratory tract is associated with increased mortality in prior reports, and recent studies suggest that further exploration of prophylaxis strategies is warranted.41 Treatment with ribavirin remains the backbone of therapy, but drug toxicity continues to limit its use. The addition of immunomodulators such as RSV immune globulin or palivizumab to ribavirin remains controversial, but a retrospective review suggests that early treatment may prevent progression to lower respiratory tract infection and lead to improved mortality.42 Infection with influenza A/B must be considered during influenza season. Treatment with oseltamivir may shorten the duration of disease when influenza A/B or parainfluenza are detected. Reactivation of latent herpes simplex virus during the pre-engraftment phase should also be considered. Treatment is similar to that in nonimmunocompromised hosts. When CMV pneumonia is suspected, careful history regarding compliance with prophylactic antivirals and CMV status of both the recipient and donor are key. A presumptive diagnosis can be made with the presence of appropriate clinical scenario, supportive radiographic images showing areas of ground-glass opacification or consolidation, and positive CMV polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. Visualization of inclusion bodies on lung biopsy tissue remains the gold standard for diagnosis. Treatment consists of CMV immunoglobulin and ganciclovir.
Fungal Pneumonia
Early fungal pneumonias have been associated with increased mortality in the HSCT population.43 Clinical suspicion should remain high and compliance with antifungal prophylaxis should be questioned thoroughly. Invasive aspergillosis (IA) remains the most common fungal infection. A bimodal distribution of onset of infection peaking on day 16 and again on day 96 has been described in the literature.44 Patients often present with classic pneumonia symptoms, but these may be accompanied by hemoptysis. Proven IA diagnosis requires visualization of fungal forms from biopsy or needle aspiration or a positive culture obtained in a sterile fashion.45 Most clinical data comes from experience with probable and possible diagnosis of IA. Bronchoalveolar lavage with testing with Aspergillus galactomannan assay has been shown to be clinically useful in establishing the clinical diagnosis in the HSCT population.46 Classic air-crescent findings on chest CT are helpful in establishing a possible diagnosis, but retrospective analysis reveals CT findings such as focal infiltrates and pulmonary nodular patterns are more common.47 First-line treatment with voriconazole has been shown to decrease short-term mortality attributable to IA but has not had an effect on long-term, all-cause mortality.48 Surgical resection is reserved for patients with refractory disease or patients presenting with massive hemoptysis.
Mucormycosis is an emerging disease with ever increasing prevalence in the HSCT population, reflecting the improved prophylaxis and treatment of IA. Initial clinical presentation is similar to IA, most commonly affecting the lung, although craniofacial involvement is classic for mucormycosis, especially in HSCT patients with diabetes.49Mucor infections can present with massive hemoptysis due to tissue invasion and disregard for tissue and fascial planes. Diagnosis of mucormycosis is associated with as much as a six-fold increase in risk for death. Diagnosis requires identification of the organism by examination or culture and biopsy is often necessary.50,51 Amphotericin B remains first-line therapy as mucormycosis is resistant to azole antifungals, with higher doses recommended for cerebral involvement.52
Candida pulmonary infections during the early HSCT period are becoming increasingly rare due to widespread use of fluconazole prophylaxis and early treatment of mucosal involvement during neutropenia. Endemic fungal infections such as blastomycosis, coccidioidomycosis, and histoplasmosis should be considered in patients inhabiting specific geographic areas or with recent travel to these areas.
- What test should be performed to evaluate for infectious causes of pneumonia?
Role of Flexible Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy
The utility of flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) in immune-compromised patients for the evaluation of pulmonary infiltrates is a frequently debated topic. Current studies suggest a diagnosis can be made in approximately 80% of cases in the immune-compromised population.32,53 Noninvasive testing such as urine and serum antigens, sputum cultures, Aspergillus galactomannan assays, viral nasal swabs, and PCR studies often lead to a diagnosis in appropriate clinical scenarios. Conservative management would dictate the use of noninvasive testing whenever possible, and randomized controlled trials have shown noninvasive testing to be noninferior to FOB in preventing need for mechanical ventilation, with no difference in overall mortality.54 FOB has been shown to be most useful in establishing a diagnosis when an infectious etiology is suspected.55 In multivariate analysis, a delay in the identification of the etiology of pulmonary infiltrate was associated with increased mortality.56 Additionally, early FOB was found to be superior to late FOB in revealing a diagnosis. 32,57 Despite its ability to detect the cause of pulmonary disease, direct antibiotic therapy, and possibly change therapy, FOB with diagnostic maneuvers has not been shown to affect mortality.58 In a large case series, FOB with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) revealed a diagnosis in approximately 30% to 50% of cases. The addition of transbronchial biopsy did not improve diagnostic utility.58 More recent studies have confirmed that the addition of transbronchial biopsy does not add to diagnostic yield and is associated with increased adverse events.59 The appropriate use of advanced techniques such as endobronchial ultrasound–guided transbronchial needle aspirations, endobronchial biopsy, and CT-guided navigational bronchoscopy has not been established and should be considered on a case-by-case basis. In summary, routine early BAL is the diagnostic test of choice, especially when infectious pulmonary complications are suspected.
Contraindications for FOB in this population mirror those in the general population. These include acute severe hypoxemic respiratory failure, myocardial ischemia or acute coronary syndrome within 2 weeks of procedure, severe thrombocytopenia, and inability to provide or obtain informed consent from patient or health care power of attorney. Coagulopathy and thrombocytopenia are common comorbid conditions in the HSCT population. A platelet count of < 20 × 103/µL has generally been used as a cut-off for routine FOB with BAL.60 Risks of the procedures should be discussed clearly with the patient, but simple FOB for airway evaluation and BAL is generally well tolerated even under these conditions.
Early Nonifectious Pulmonary Complications
Case Patient 2 Continued
Bronchoscopy with BAL performed the day after admission is unremarkable and stains and cultures are negative for viral, bacterial, and fungal organisms. The patient is initially started on broad-spectrum antibiotics, but his oxygenation continues to worsen to the point that he is placed on noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. He is started empirically on amphotericin B and eventually is intubated. VATS lung biopsy is ultimately performed and pathology is consistent with diffuse alveolar damage.
- Based on these biopsy findings, what is the diagnosis?
Based on the pathology consistent with diffuse alveolar damage, a diagnosis of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome (IPS) is made.
- What noninfectious pulmonary complications occur in the early post-transplant period?
The overall incidence of noninfectious pulmonary complications after HSCT is generally estimated at 20% to 30%.32 Acute pulmonary edema is a common very early noninfectious pulmonary complication and clinically the most straightforward to treat. Three distinct clinical syndromes—peri-engraftment respiratory distress syndrome (PERDS), diffuse alveolar hemorrhage (DAH), and IPS—comprise the remainder of the pertinent early noninfectious complications. Clinical presentation differs based upon the disease entity. Recent studies have evaluated the role of angiotensin-converting enzyme polymorphisms as a predictive marker for risk of developing early noninfectious pulmonary complications.61
Peri-Engraftment Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PERDS is a clinical syndrome comprising the cardinal features of erythematous rash and fever along with noncardiogenic pulmonary infiltrates and hypoxemia that occur in the peri-engraftment period, defined as recovery of absolute neutrophil count to > 500/μL on 2 consecutive days.62 PERDS occurs in the autologous HSCT population and may be a clinical correlate to early GVHD in the allogeneic HSCT population. It is hypothesized that the pathophysiology underlying PERDS is an autoimmune-related capillary leak caused by pro-inflammatory cytokine release.63 Treatment remains anecdotal and currently consists of supportive care and high-dose corticosteroids. Some have favored limiting the use of gCSF given its role in stimulating rapid white blood cell recovery.33 Prognosis is favorable, but progression to fulminant respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation portends a poor prognosis.
Diffuse Alveolar Hemorrhage
DAH is clinical syndrome consisting of diffuse alveolar infiltrates on pulmonary imaging combined with progressively bloodier return per aliquot during BAL in 3 different subsegments or more than 20% hemosiderin-laden macrophages on BAL fluid evaluation. Classically, DAH is defined in the absence of pulmonary infection or cardiac dysfunction. The pathophysiology is thought to be related to inflammation of pulmonary vasculature within the alveolar walls leading to alveolitis. Although no prospective trials exist, early use of high-dose corticosteroid therapy is thought to improve outcomes;64,65 a recent study, however, showed low-dose steroids may be associated with the lowest mortality.66 Mortality is directly linked to the presence of superimposed infection, need for mechanical ventilation, late onset, and development of multiorgan failure.67
Idiopathic Pneumonia Syndrome
IPS is a complex clinical syndrome whose pathology is felt to stem from a variety of possible lung insults such as direct myeloablative drug toxicity, occult pulmonary infection, or cytokine-driven inflammation. The ATS published an article further subcategorizing IPS as different clinical entities based upon whether the primary insult involves the vascular endothelium, interstitial tissue, and airway tissue, truly idiopathic, or unclassified.68 In clinical practice, IPS is defined as widespread alveolar injury in the absence of evidence of renal failure, heart failure, and excessive fluid resuscitation. In addition, negative testing for a variety of bacterial, viral, and fungal causes is also necessary.69 Clinical syndromes included within the IPS definition are ARDS, acute interstitial pneumonia, DAH, cryptogenic organizing pneumonia, and BOS.70 Risk factors for developing IPS include TBI, older age of recipient, acute GVHD, and underlying diagnosis of AML or myelodysplastic syndrome.12 In addition, it has been shown that risk for developing IPS is lower in patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT who receive non-myeloablative conditioning regimens.71 The pathologic finding in IPS is diffuse alveolar damage. A 2006 study in which investigators reviewed BAL samples from patients with IPS found that 3% of the patients had PCR evidence of human metapneumovirus infection, and a study in 2015 found PCR evidence of infection in 53% of BAL samples from patients diagnosed with IPS.72,73 This fuels the debate on whether IPS is truly an infection-driven process where the source of infection, pulmonary or otherwise, simply escapes detection. Various surfactant proteins, which play a role in decreasing surface tension within the alveolar interface and function as mediators within the innate immunity of the lung, have been studied in regard to development of IPS. Small retrospective studies have shown a trend toward lower pre-transplant serum protein surfactant D and the development of IPS.74
The diagnosis of IPS does not require pathologic diagnosis in most circumstances. The correct clinical findings in association with a negative infectious workup lead to a presumptive diagnosis of IPS. The extent of the infectious workup that must be completed to adequately rule out infection is often a difficult clinical question. Recent recommendations include BAL fluid evaluation for routine bacterial cultures, appropriate viral culture, and consideration of PCR testing to evaluate for Mycoplasma, Chlamydia, and Aspergillus antigens.75 Transbronchial biopsy continues to appear in recommendations, but is not routinely performed and should be completed as the patient’s clinical status permits.8,68 Table 3 reviews basic features of early noninfectious pulmonary complications.
Treatment of IPS centers around moderate to high doses of corticosteroids. Based on IPS experimental modes, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α has been implicated as an important mediator. Unfortunately, several studies evaluating etanercept have produced conflicting results, and this agent’s clinical effects on morbidity and mortality remain in question.76
- What treatment should be offered to the patient with diffuse alveolar damage on biopsy?
Treatment consists of supportive care and empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics with consideration of high-dose corticosteroids. Based upon early studies in murine models implicating TNF, pilot studies were performed evaluating etanercept as a possible safe and effective addition to high-dose systemic corticosteroids.77 Although these results were promising, data from a truncated randomized control clinical trial failed to show improvement in patient response in the adult population.76 More recent data from the same author suggests that pediatric populations with IPS are, however, responsive to etanercept and high-dose corticosteroid therapy.78 When IPS develops as a late complication, treatment with high-dose corticosteroids (2 mg/kg/day) and etanercept (0.4 mg/kg twice weekly) has been shown to improve 2-year survival.79
Case Patient 2 Conclusion
The patient is started on steroids and makes a speedy recovery. He is successfully extubated 5 days later.
Conclusion
Careful pretransplant evaluation, including a full set of pulmonary function tests, can help predict a patient’s risk for pulmonary complications after transplant, allowing risk factor modification strategies to be implemented prior to transplant, including smoking cessation. It also helps identify patients at high risk for complications who will require closer monitoring after transplantation. Early posttransplant complications include infectious and noninfectious entities. Bacterial, viral, and fungal pneumonias are in the differential of infectious pneumonia, and bronchoscopy can be helpful in establishing a diagnosis. A common, important noninfectious cause of early pulmonary complications is IPS, which is treated with steroids and sometimes anti-TNF therapy.
1. Gratwohl A, Baldomero H, Aljurf M, et al. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a global perspective. JAMA 2010;303:1617–24.
2. Kotloff RM, Ahya VN, Crawford SW. Pulmonary complications of solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004;170:22–48.
4. Copelan EA. Hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. N Engl J Med 2006;354:1813–26.
5. Anasetti C, Logan BR, Lee SJ, et al. Peripheral-blood stem cells versus bone marrow from unrelated donors. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1487–96.
6. Giralt S, Ballen K, Rizzo D, et al. Reduced-intensity conditioning regimen workshop: defining the dose spectrum. Report of a workshop convened by the center for international blood and marrow transplant research. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15:367–9.
7. Shulman HM, Kleiner D, Lee SJ, et al. Histopathologic diagnosis of chronic graft-versus-host disease: National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on Criteria for Clinical Trials in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: II. Pathology Working Group Report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006;12:31–47.
8. Afessa B, Abdulai RM, Kremers WK, et al. Risk factors and outcome of pulmonary complications after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Chest 2012;141:442–50.
9. Bolwell BJ. Are predictive factors clinically useful in bone marrow transplantation? Bone Marrow Transplant 2003;32:853–61.
10. Carlson K, Backlund L, Smedmyr B, et al. Pulmonary function and complications subsequent to autologous bone marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 1994;14:805–11.
11. Clark JG, Schwartz DA, Flournoy N, et al. Risk factors for airflow obstruction in recipients of bone marrow transplants. Ann Intern Med 1987;107:648–56.
12. Crawford SW, Fisher L. Predictive value of pulmonary function tests before marrow transplantation. Chest 1992; 101:1257–64.
13. Ghalie R, Szidon JP, Thompson L, et al. Evaluation of pulmonary complications after bone marrow transplantation: the role of pretransplant pulmonary function tests. Bone Marrow Transplant 1992;10:359–65.
14. Ho VT, Weller E, Lee SJ, et al. Prognostic factors for early severe pulmonary complications after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2001;7:223–9.
15. Horak DA, Schmidt GM, Zaia JA, et al. Pretransplant pulmonary function predicts cytomegalovirus-associated interstitial pneumonia following bone marrow transplantation. Chest 1992;102:1484–90.
16. Ramirez-Sarmiento A, Orozco-Levi M, Walter EC, et al. Influence of pretransplantation restrictive lung disease on allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation outcomes. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2010;16:199–206.
17. White AC, Terrin N, Miller KB, Ryan HF. Impaired respiratory and skeletal muscle strength in patients prior to hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Chest 2005;128145–52.
18. Afessa B. Pretransplant pulmonary evaluation of the blood and marrow transplant recipient. Chest 2005;128:8–10.
19. Parimon T, Madtes DK, Au DH, et al. Pretransplant lung function, respiratory failure, and mortality after stem cell transplantation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005;172:384–90.
20. Pavletic SZ, Martin P, Lee SJ, et al. Measuring therapeutic response in chronic graft-versus-host disease: National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on Criteria for Clinical Trials in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: IV. Response Criteria Working Group report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006;12:252–66.
21. Parimon T, Au DH, Martin PJ, Chien JW. A risk score for mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:407–14.
22. Au BK, Gooley TA, Armand P, et al. Reevaluation of the pretransplant assessment of mortality score after allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2015;21:848–54.
23. Sorror ML, Maris MB, Storb R, et al. Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT)-specific comorbidity index: a new tool for risk assessment before allogeneic HCT. Blood 2005;106:2912–9.
24. Chien JW, Sullivan KM. Carbon monoxide diffusion capacity: how low can you go for hematopoietic cell transplantation eligibility? Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15: 447–53.
25. Coffey DG, Pollyea DA, Myint H, et al. Adjusting DLCO for Hb and its effects on the Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation-specific Comorbidity Index. Bone Marrow Transplant 2013;48:1253–6.
26. Kasow KA, Krueger J, Srivastava DK, et al. Clinical utility of computed tomography screening of chest, abdomen, and sinuses before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: the St. Jude experience. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15:490–5.
27. Hamadani M, Craig M, Awan FT, Devine SM. How we approach patient evaluation for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2010;45: 1259–68.
28. Savani BN, Montero A, Wu C, et al. Prediction and prevention of transplant-related mortality from pulmonary causes after total body irradiation and allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2005;11:223–30.
29. Ehlers SL, Gastineau DA, Patten CA, et al. The impact of smoking on outcomes among patients undergoing hematopoietic SCT for the treatment of acute leukemia. Bone Marrow Transplant 2011;46:285–90.
30. Marks DI, Ballen K, Logan BR, et al. The effect of smoking on allogeneic transplant outcomes. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15:1277–87.
31. Tran BT, Halperin A, Chien JW. Cigarette smoking and outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2011;17:1004–11.
32. Lucena CM, Torres A, Rovira M, et al. Pulmonary complications in hematopoietic SCT: a prospective study. Bone Marrow Transplant 2014;49:1293–9.
33. Chi AK, Soubani AO, White AC, Miller KB. An update on pulmonary complications of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Chest 2013;144:1913–22.
34. Dunagan DP, Baker AM, Hurd DD, Haponik EF. Bronchoscopic evaluation of pulmonary infiltrates following bone marrow transplantation. Chest 1997;111:135–41.
35. Naeem N, Reed MD, Creger RJ, et al. Transfer of the hematopoietic stem cell transplant patient to the intensive care unit: does it really matter? Bone Marrow Transplant 2006;37:119–33.
36. Afessa B, Tefferi A, Hoagland HC, et al. Outcome of recipients of bone marrow transplants who require intensive care unit support. Mayo Clin Proc 1992;67:117–22.
37. Parody R, Martino R, de la Camara R, et al. Fungal and viral infections after allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation from unrelated donors in adults: improving outcomes over time. Bone Marrow Transplant 2015;50:274–81.
38. Orasch C, Weisser M, Mertz D, et al. Comparison of infectious complications during induction/consolidation chemotherapy versus allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2010;45:521–6.
39. Aguilar-Guisado M, Jimenez-Jambrina M, Espigado I, et al. Pneumonia in allogeneic stem cell transplantation recipients: a multicenter prospective study. Clin Transplant 2011;25:E629–38.
40. Palacios G, Hornig M, Cisterna D, et al. Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfection is correlated with the severity of H1N1 pandemic influenza. PLoS One 2009;4:e8540.
41. Hynicka LM, Ensor CR. Prophylaxis and treatment of respiratory syncytial virus in adult immunocompromised patients. Ann Pharmacother 2012;46:558–66.
42. Shah JN, Chemaly RF. Management of RSV infections in adult recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood 2011;2755–63.
43. Marr KA, Bowden RA. Fungal infections in patients undergoing blood and marrow transplantation. Transpl Infect Dis 1999;1:237–46.
44. Wald A, Leisenring W, van Burik JA, Bowden RA. Epidemiology of Aspergillus infections in a large cohort of patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation. J Infect Dis 1997;175:1459–66.
45. Ascioglu S, Rex JH, de Pauw B, et al. Defining opportunistic invasive fungal infections in immunocompromised patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplants: an international consensus. Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:7–14.
46. Fisher CE, Stevens AM, Leisenring W, et al. Independent contribution of bronchoalveolar lavage and serum galactomannan in the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Transpl Infect Dis 2014;16:505–10.
47. Kojima R, Tateishi U, Kami M, et al. Chest computed tomography of late invasive aspergillosis after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2005;11:506–11.
48. Salmeron G, Porcher R, Bergeron A, et al. Persistent poor long-term prognosis of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients surviving invasive aspergillosis. Haematologica 2012;97:1357–63.
49. McNulty JS. Rhinocerebral mucormycosis: predisposing factors. Laryngoscope 1982;92(10 Pt 1):1140.
50. Walsh TJ, Gamaletsou MN, McGinnis MR, et al. Early clinical and laboratory diagnosis of invasive pulmonary, extrapulmonary, and disseminated mucormycosis (zygomycosis). Clin Infect Dis 2012;54 Suppl 1:S55–60.
51. Klingspor L, Saaedi B, Ljungman P, Szakos A. Epidemiology and outcomes of patients with invasive mould infections: a retrospective observational study from a single centre (2005-2009). Mycoses 2015;58:470–7.
52. Danion F, Aguilar C, Catherinot E, et al. Mucormycosis: new developments in a persistently devastating infection. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2015;36:692–70.
53. Rano A, Agusti C, Jimenez P, et al. Pulmonary infiltrates in non-HIV immunocompromised patients: a diagnostic approach using non-invasive and bronchoscopic procedures. Thorax 2001;56:379–87.
54. Azoulay E, Mokart D, Rabbat A, et al. Diagnostic bronchoscopy in hematology and oncology patients with acute respiratory failure: prospective multicenter data. Crit Care Med 2008;36:100–7.
55. Jain P, Sandur S, Meli Y, et al. Role of flexible bronchoscopy in immunocompromised patients with lung infiltrates. Chest 2004;125:712–22.
56. Rano A, Agusti C, Benito N, et al. Prognostic factors of non-HIV immunocompromised patients with pulmonary infiltrates. Chest 2002;122:253–61.
57. Shannon VR, Andersson BS, Lei X, et al. Utility of early versus late fiberoptic bronchoscopy in the evaluation of new pulmonary infiltrates following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2010;45:647–55.
58. Patel NR, Lee PS, Kim JH, et al. The influence of diagnostic bronchoscopy on clinical outcomes comparing adult autologous and allogeneic bone marrow transplant patients. Chest 2005;127:1388–96.
59. Chellapandian D, Lehrnbecher T, Phillips B, et al. Bronchoalveolar lavage and lung biopsy in patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:501–9.
60. Carr IM, Koegelenberg CF, von Groote-Bidlingmaier F, et al. Blood loss during flexible bronchoscopy: a prospective observational study. Respiration 2012;84:312–8.
61. Miyamoto M, Onizuka M, Machida S, et al. ACE deletion polymorphism is associated with a high risk of non-infectious pulmonary complications after stem cell transplantation. Int J Hematol 2014;99:175–83.
62. Capizzi SA, Kumar S, Huneke NE, et al. Peri-engraftment respiratory distress syndrome during autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001;27:1299–303.
63. Spitzer TR. Engraftment syndrome following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001;27:893–8.
64. Wanko SO, Broadwater G, Folz RJ, Chao NJ. Diffuse alveolar hemorrhage: retrospective review of clinical outcome in allogeneic transplant recipients treated with aminocaproic acid. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006;12:949–53.
65. Metcalf JP, Rennard SI, Reed EC, et al. Corticosteroids as adjunctive therapy for diffuse alveolar hemorrhage associated with bone marrow transplantation. University of Nebraska Medical Center Bone Marrow Transplant Group. Am J Med 1994;96:327–34.
66. Rathi NK, Tanner AR, Dinh A, et al. Low-, medium- and high-dose steroids with or without aminocaproic acid in adult hematopoietic SCT patients with diffuse alveolar hemorrhage. Bone Marrow Transplant 2015;50:420–6.
67. Afessa B, Tefferi A, Litzow MR, Peters SG. Outcome of diffuse alveolar hemorrhage in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;166:1364–8.
68. Panoskaltsis-Mortari A, Griese M, Madtes DK, et al. An official American Thoracic Society research statement: noninfectious lung injury after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: idiopathic pneumonia syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011;183:1262–79.
69. Clark JG, Hansen JA, Hertz MI, Pet al. NHLBI workshop summary. Idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after bone marrow transplantation. Am Rev Resp Dis 1993;147:1601–6.
70. Vande Vusse LK, Madtes DK. Early onset noninfectious pulmonary syndromes after hematopoietic cell transplantation. Clin Chest Med 2017;38:233–48.
71. Fukuda T, Hackman RC, Guthrie KA, et al. Risks and outcomes of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after nonmyeloablative and conventional conditioning regimens for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood 2003;102:2777–85.
72. Englund JA, Boeckh M, Kuypers J, et al. Brief communication: fatal human metapneumovirus infection in stem-cell transplant recipients. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:344–9.
73. Seo S, Renaud C, Kuypers JM, et al. Idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after hematopoietic cell transplantation: evidence of occult infectious etiologies. Blood 2015;125:3789–97.
74. Nakane T, Nakamae H, Kamoi H, et al. Prognostic value of serum surfactant protein D level prior to transplant for the development of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome and idiopathic pneumonia syndrome following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2008;42:43–9.
75. Gilbert CR, Lerner A, Baram M, Awsare BK. Utility of flexible bronchoscopy in the evaluation of pulmonary infiltrates in the hematopoietic stem cell transplant population—a single center fourteen year experience. Arch Bronconeumol 2013;49:189–95.
76. Yanik GA, Horowitz MM, Weisdorf DJ, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor: enbrel (etanercept) for the treatment of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation: blood and marrow transplant clinical trials network protocol. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2014;20:858–64.
77. Levine JE, Paczesny S, Mineishi S, et al. Etanercept plus methylprednisolone as initial therapy for acute graft-versus-host disease. Blood 2008;111:2470–5.
78. Yanik GA, Grupp SA, Pulsipher MA, et al. TNF-receptor inhibitor therapy for the treatment of children with idiopathic pneumonia syndrome. A joint Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplant Consortium and Children’s Oncology Group Study (ASCT0521). Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2015;21:67–73.
79. Thompson J, Yin Z, D’Souza A, et al. Etanercept and corticosteroid therapy for the treatment of late-onset idiopathic pneumonia syndrome. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant J 2017; 23:1955–60.
1. Gratwohl A, Baldomero H, Aljurf M, et al. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a global perspective. JAMA 2010;303:1617–24.
2. Kotloff RM, Ahya VN, Crawford SW. Pulmonary complications of solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004;170:22–48.
4. Copelan EA. Hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. N Engl J Med 2006;354:1813–26.
5. Anasetti C, Logan BR, Lee SJ, et al. Peripheral-blood stem cells versus bone marrow from unrelated donors. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1487–96.
6. Giralt S, Ballen K, Rizzo D, et al. Reduced-intensity conditioning regimen workshop: defining the dose spectrum. Report of a workshop convened by the center for international blood and marrow transplant research. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15:367–9.
7. Shulman HM, Kleiner D, Lee SJ, et al. Histopathologic diagnosis of chronic graft-versus-host disease: National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on Criteria for Clinical Trials in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: II. Pathology Working Group Report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006;12:31–47.
8. Afessa B, Abdulai RM, Kremers WK, et al. Risk factors and outcome of pulmonary complications after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Chest 2012;141:442–50.
9. Bolwell BJ. Are predictive factors clinically useful in bone marrow transplantation? Bone Marrow Transplant 2003;32:853–61.
10. Carlson K, Backlund L, Smedmyr B, et al. Pulmonary function and complications subsequent to autologous bone marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 1994;14:805–11.
11. Clark JG, Schwartz DA, Flournoy N, et al. Risk factors for airflow obstruction in recipients of bone marrow transplants. Ann Intern Med 1987;107:648–56.
12. Crawford SW, Fisher L. Predictive value of pulmonary function tests before marrow transplantation. Chest 1992; 101:1257–64.
13. Ghalie R, Szidon JP, Thompson L, et al. Evaluation of pulmonary complications after bone marrow transplantation: the role of pretransplant pulmonary function tests. Bone Marrow Transplant 1992;10:359–65.
14. Ho VT, Weller E, Lee SJ, et al. Prognostic factors for early severe pulmonary complications after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2001;7:223–9.
15. Horak DA, Schmidt GM, Zaia JA, et al. Pretransplant pulmonary function predicts cytomegalovirus-associated interstitial pneumonia following bone marrow transplantation. Chest 1992;102:1484–90.
16. Ramirez-Sarmiento A, Orozco-Levi M, Walter EC, et al. Influence of pretransplantation restrictive lung disease on allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation outcomes. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2010;16:199–206.
17. White AC, Terrin N, Miller KB, Ryan HF. Impaired respiratory and skeletal muscle strength in patients prior to hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Chest 2005;128145–52.
18. Afessa B. Pretransplant pulmonary evaluation of the blood and marrow transplant recipient. Chest 2005;128:8–10.
19. Parimon T, Madtes DK, Au DH, et al. Pretransplant lung function, respiratory failure, and mortality after stem cell transplantation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005;172:384–90.
20. Pavletic SZ, Martin P, Lee SJ, et al. Measuring therapeutic response in chronic graft-versus-host disease: National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on Criteria for Clinical Trials in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: IV. Response Criteria Working Group report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006;12:252–66.
21. Parimon T, Au DH, Martin PJ, Chien JW. A risk score for mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:407–14.
22. Au BK, Gooley TA, Armand P, et al. Reevaluation of the pretransplant assessment of mortality score after allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2015;21:848–54.
23. Sorror ML, Maris MB, Storb R, et al. Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT)-specific comorbidity index: a new tool for risk assessment before allogeneic HCT. Blood 2005;106:2912–9.
24. Chien JW, Sullivan KM. Carbon monoxide diffusion capacity: how low can you go for hematopoietic cell transplantation eligibility? Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15: 447–53.
25. Coffey DG, Pollyea DA, Myint H, et al. Adjusting DLCO for Hb and its effects on the Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation-specific Comorbidity Index. Bone Marrow Transplant 2013;48:1253–6.
26. Kasow KA, Krueger J, Srivastava DK, et al. Clinical utility of computed tomography screening of chest, abdomen, and sinuses before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: the St. Jude experience. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15:490–5.
27. Hamadani M, Craig M, Awan FT, Devine SM. How we approach patient evaluation for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2010;45: 1259–68.
28. Savani BN, Montero A, Wu C, et al. Prediction and prevention of transplant-related mortality from pulmonary causes after total body irradiation and allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2005;11:223–30.
29. Ehlers SL, Gastineau DA, Patten CA, et al. The impact of smoking on outcomes among patients undergoing hematopoietic SCT for the treatment of acute leukemia. Bone Marrow Transplant 2011;46:285–90.
30. Marks DI, Ballen K, Logan BR, et al. The effect of smoking on allogeneic transplant outcomes. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009;15:1277–87.
31. Tran BT, Halperin A, Chien JW. Cigarette smoking and outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2011;17:1004–11.
32. Lucena CM, Torres A, Rovira M, et al. Pulmonary complications in hematopoietic SCT: a prospective study. Bone Marrow Transplant 2014;49:1293–9.
33. Chi AK, Soubani AO, White AC, Miller KB. An update on pulmonary complications of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Chest 2013;144:1913–22.
34. Dunagan DP, Baker AM, Hurd DD, Haponik EF. Bronchoscopic evaluation of pulmonary infiltrates following bone marrow transplantation. Chest 1997;111:135–41.
35. Naeem N, Reed MD, Creger RJ, et al. Transfer of the hematopoietic stem cell transplant patient to the intensive care unit: does it really matter? Bone Marrow Transplant 2006;37:119–33.
36. Afessa B, Tefferi A, Hoagland HC, et al. Outcome of recipients of bone marrow transplants who require intensive care unit support. Mayo Clin Proc 1992;67:117–22.
37. Parody R, Martino R, de la Camara R, et al. Fungal and viral infections after allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation from unrelated donors in adults: improving outcomes over time. Bone Marrow Transplant 2015;50:274–81.
38. Orasch C, Weisser M, Mertz D, et al. Comparison of infectious complications during induction/consolidation chemotherapy versus allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2010;45:521–6.
39. Aguilar-Guisado M, Jimenez-Jambrina M, Espigado I, et al. Pneumonia in allogeneic stem cell transplantation recipients: a multicenter prospective study. Clin Transplant 2011;25:E629–38.
40. Palacios G, Hornig M, Cisterna D, et al. Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfection is correlated with the severity of H1N1 pandemic influenza. PLoS One 2009;4:e8540.
41. Hynicka LM, Ensor CR. Prophylaxis and treatment of respiratory syncytial virus in adult immunocompromised patients. Ann Pharmacother 2012;46:558–66.
42. Shah JN, Chemaly RF. Management of RSV infections in adult recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood 2011;2755–63.
43. Marr KA, Bowden RA. Fungal infections in patients undergoing blood and marrow transplantation. Transpl Infect Dis 1999;1:237–46.
44. Wald A, Leisenring W, van Burik JA, Bowden RA. Epidemiology of Aspergillus infections in a large cohort of patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation. J Infect Dis 1997;175:1459–66.
45. Ascioglu S, Rex JH, de Pauw B, et al. Defining opportunistic invasive fungal infections in immunocompromised patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplants: an international consensus. Clin Infect Dis 2002;34:7–14.
46. Fisher CE, Stevens AM, Leisenring W, et al. Independent contribution of bronchoalveolar lavage and serum galactomannan in the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Transpl Infect Dis 2014;16:505–10.
47. Kojima R, Tateishi U, Kami M, et al. Chest computed tomography of late invasive aspergillosis after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2005;11:506–11.
48. Salmeron G, Porcher R, Bergeron A, et al. Persistent poor long-term prognosis of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients surviving invasive aspergillosis. Haematologica 2012;97:1357–63.
49. McNulty JS. Rhinocerebral mucormycosis: predisposing factors. Laryngoscope 1982;92(10 Pt 1):1140.
50. Walsh TJ, Gamaletsou MN, McGinnis MR, et al. Early clinical and laboratory diagnosis of invasive pulmonary, extrapulmonary, and disseminated mucormycosis (zygomycosis). Clin Infect Dis 2012;54 Suppl 1:S55–60.
51. Klingspor L, Saaedi B, Ljungman P, Szakos A. Epidemiology and outcomes of patients with invasive mould infections: a retrospective observational study from a single centre (2005-2009). Mycoses 2015;58:470–7.
52. Danion F, Aguilar C, Catherinot E, et al. Mucormycosis: new developments in a persistently devastating infection. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2015;36:692–70.
53. Rano A, Agusti C, Jimenez P, et al. Pulmonary infiltrates in non-HIV immunocompromised patients: a diagnostic approach using non-invasive and bronchoscopic procedures. Thorax 2001;56:379–87.
54. Azoulay E, Mokart D, Rabbat A, et al. Diagnostic bronchoscopy in hematology and oncology patients with acute respiratory failure: prospective multicenter data. Crit Care Med 2008;36:100–7.
55. Jain P, Sandur S, Meli Y, et al. Role of flexible bronchoscopy in immunocompromised patients with lung infiltrates. Chest 2004;125:712–22.
56. Rano A, Agusti C, Benito N, et al. Prognostic factors of non-HIV immunocompromised patients with pulmonary infiltrates. Chest 2002;122:253–61.
57. Shannon VR, Andersson BS, Lei X, et al. Utility of early versus late fiberoptic bronchoscopy in the evaluation of new pulmonary infiltrates following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2010;45:647–55.
58. Patel NR, Lee PS, Kim JH, et al. The influence of diagnostic bronchoscopy on clinical outcomes comparing adult autologous and allogeneic bone marrow transplant patients. Chest 2005;127:1388–96.
59. Chellapandian D, Lehrnbecher T, Phillips B, et al. Bronchoalveolar lavage and lung biopsy in patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:501–9.
60. Carr IM, Koegelenberg CF, von Groote-Bidlingmaier F, et al. Blood loss during flexible bronchoscopy: a prospective observational study. Respiration 2012;84:312–8.
61. Miyamoto M, Onizuka M, Machida S, et al. ACE deletion polymorphism is associated with a high risk of non-infectious pulmonary complications after stem cell transplantation. Int J Hematol 2014;99:175–83.
62. Capizzi SA, Kumar S, Huneke NE, et al. Peri-engraftment respiratory distress syndrome during autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001;27:1299–303.
63. Spitzer TR. Engraftment syndrome following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001;27:893–8.
64. Wanko SO, Broadwater G, Folz RJ, Chao NJ. Diffuse alveolar hemorrhage: retrospective review of clinical outcome in allogeneic transplant recipients treated with aminocaproic acid. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006;12:949–53.
65. Metcalf JP, Rennard SI, Reed EC, et al. Corticosteroids as adjunctive therapy for diffuse alveolar hemorrhage associated with bone marrow transplantation. University of Nebraska Medical Center Bone Marrow Transplant Group. Am J Med 1994;96:327–34.
66. Rathi NK, Tanner AR, Dinh A, et al. Low-, medium- and high-dose steroids with or without aminocaproic acid in adult hematopoietic SCT patients with diffuse alveolar hemorrhage. Bone Marrow Transplant 2015;50:420–6.
67. Afessa B, Tefferi A, Litzow MR, Peters SG. Outcome of diffuse alveolar hemorrhage in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;166:1364–8.
68. Panoskaltsis-Mortari A, Griese M, Madtes DK, et al. An official American Thoracic Society research statement: noninfectious lung injury after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: idiopathic pneumonia syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011;183:1262–79.
69. Clark JG, Hansen JA, Hertz MI, Pet al. NHLBI workshop summary. Idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after bone marrow transplantation. Am Rev Resp Dis 1993;147:1601–6.
70. Vande Vusse LK, Madtes DK. Early onset noninfectious pulmonary syndromes after hematopoietic cell transplantation. Clin Chest Med 2017;38:233–48.
71. Fukuda T, Hackman RC, Guthrie KA, et al. Risks and outcomes of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after nonmyeloablative and conventional conditioning regimens for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood 2003;102:2777–85.
72. Englund JA, Boeckh M, Kuypers J, et al. Brief communication: fatal human metapneumovirus infection in stem-cell transplant recipients. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:344–9.
73. Seo S, Renaud C, Kuypers JM, et al. Idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after hematopoietic cell transplantation: evidence of occult infectious etiologies. Blood 2015;125:3789–97.
74. Nakane T, Nakamae H, Kamoi H, et al. Prognostic value of serum surfactant protein D level prior to transplant for the development of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome and idiopathic pneumonia syndrome following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2008;42:43–9.
75. Gilbert CR, Lerner A, Baram M, Awsare BK. Utility of flexible bronchoscopy in the evaluation of pulmonary infiltrates in the hematopoietic stem cell transplant population—a single center fourteen year experience. Arch Bronconeumol 2013;49:189–95.
76. Yanik GA, Horowitz MM, Weisdorf DJ, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor: enbrel (etanercept) for the treatment of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation: blood and marrow transplant clinical trials network protocol. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2014;20:858–64.
77. Levine JE, Paczesny S, Mineishi S, et al. Etanercept plus methylprednisolone as initial therapy for acute graft-versus-host disease. Blood 2008;111:2470–5.
78. Yanik GA, Grupp SA, Pulsipher MA, et al. TNF-receptor inhibitor therapy for the treatment of children with idiopathic pneumonia syndrome. A joint Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplant Consortium and Children’s Oncology Group Study (ASCT0521). Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2015;21:67–73.
79. Thompson J, Yin Z, D’Souza A, et al. Etanercept and corticosteroid therapy for the treatment of late-onset idiopathic pneumonia syndrome. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant J 2017; 23:1955–60.
Gilteritinib prolonged survival in FLT3-mutated AML
ATLANTA – The FLT3 inhibitor gilteritinib (Xospata) significantly prolonged overall survival, compared with salvage chemotherapy, in patients with FLT3-mutated relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia, Alexander E. Perl, MD, from the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia reported at the 2019 annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR).
In a video interview, Dr. Perl discussed the results of the ADMIRAL global phase 3 randomized trial and described the current state of therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory AML bearing FLT3 mutations. Up to 70% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia will experience a relapse, and up to 40% may have disease that is resistant to induction chemotherapy. Survival for these patients is generally poor.
In particular, patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT3-activating mutations are at increased risk for early relapse and poor overall survival.
The ADMIRAL trial is funded by Astellas Pharma. Dr. Perl disclosed advisory board participation, consulting fees, and institutional support from Astellas and others.
ATLANTA – The FLT3 inhibitor gilteritinib (Xospata) significantly prolonged overall survival, compared with salvage chemotherapy, in patients with FLT3-mutated relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia, Alexander E. Perl, MD, from the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia reported at the 2019 annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR).
In a video interview, Dr. Perl discussed the results of the ADMIRAL global phase 3 randomized trial and described the current state of therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory AML bearing FLT3 mutations. Up to 70% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia will experience a relapse, and up to 40% may have disease that is resistant to induction chemotherapy. Survival for these patients is generally poor.
In particular, patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT3-activating mutations are at increased risk for early relapse and poor overall survival.
The ADMIRAL trial is funded by Astellas Pharma. Dr. Perl disclosed advisory board participation, consulting fees, and institutional support from Astellas and others.
ATLANTA – The FLT3 inhibitor gilteritinib (Xospata) significantly prolonged overall survival, compared with salvage chemotherapy, in patients with FLT3-mutated relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia, Alexander E. Perl, MD, from the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia reported at the 2019 annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR).
In a video interview, Dr. Perl discussed the results of the ADMIRAL global phase 3 randomized trial and described the current state of therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory AML bearing FLT3 mutations. Up to 70% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia will experience a relapse, and up to 40% may have disease that is resistant to induction chemotherapy. Survival for these patients is generally poor.
In particular, patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT3-activating mutations are at increased risk for early relapse and poor overall survival.
The ADMIRAL trial is funded by Astellas Pharma. Dr. Perl disclosed advisory board participation, consulting fees, and institutional support from Astellas and others.
REPORTING FROM AACR 2019
Bendamustine/rituximab combo proves viable for comorbid CLL
A combination of bendamustine and rituximab generated an 88% overall response rate and 96% overall survival rate at 2 years among patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in a study of 83 patients aged 53-83 years.
Although combined fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab has demonstrated success in younger patients with CLL, this therapy is often considered too aggressive for the majority of CLL patients, who tend to be older and have multiple comorbidities, wrote Martin Špacek, MD, of Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague and his colleagues.
The alternative treatment combination of bendamustine and rituximab (BR) has not been well studied in patients with comorbidities, they said.
In a study published in Leukemia Research, the researchers enrolled 83 previously untreated adults with progressive CLL. The average age of the participants was 71 years, and 61% were men. The median creatinine clearance for the study population was 65 mL/min, and all patients had comorbidities, defined as scores greater than 6 on the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS).
All patients were prescribed 90 mg/m2 bendamustine on days 1 and 2 combined with 375 mg/m2 rituximab on day 0 of the first course, and 500 mg/m2 rituximab on day 1 during subsequent courses every 28 days for a maximum of six cycles.
The overall response rate to BR was 88.0%, with a complete response rate of 20.5%. At 2 years, progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 69.9% and 96.2%, respectively.
A total of 51 patients (61.4%) experienced at least one grade 3 or 4 adverse event. The most common hematologic effects were neutropenia (40 patients), thrombocytopenia (14 patients), and anemia (8 patients). The most common nonhematologic effects were grade 3– or grade 4–level infections in 12 patients. Six patients developed severe skin rash.
Additionally, one patient developed sepsis during treatment and died after the first course of therapy.
“Age and CIRS failed to predict any severe toxicities or BR dose reduction,” the researchers noted.
The findings support data from previous studies and represent the largest study of CLL patients with significant comorbidities to be treated with BR, the researchers said.
More prospective research is needed, but the results demonstrate that “chemoimmunotherapy with BR is an effective therapeutic option with manageable toxicity for the initial treatment of CLL patients with significant comorbidities,” the investigators wrote.
The study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic, the Charles University Progres program, and the Czech CLL Study Group. Researchers reported honoraria and travel grants from Mundipharma and Roche.
SOURCE: Spacek M et al. Leuk Res. 2019;79:17-21.
A combination of bendamustine and rituximab generated an 88% overall response rate and 96% overall survival rate at 2 years among patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in a study of 83 patients aged 53-83 years.
Although combined fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab has demonstrated success in younger patients with CLL, this therapy is often considered too aggressive for the majority of CLL patients, who tend to be older and have multiple comorbidities, wrote Martin Špacek, MD, of Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague and his colleagues.
The alternative treatment combination of bendamustine and rituximab (BR) has not been well studied in patients with comorbidities, they said.
In a study published in Leukemia Research, the researchers enrolled 83 previously untreated adults with progressive CLL. The average age of the participants was 71 years, and 61% were men. The median creatinine clearance for the study population was 65 mL/min, and all patients had comorbidities, defined as scores greater than 6 on the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS).
All patients were prescribed 90 mg/m2 bendamustine on days 1 and 2 combined with 375 mg/m2 rituximab on day 0 of the first course, and 500 mg/m2 rituximab on day 1 during subsequent courses every 28 days for a maximum of six cycles.
The overall response rate to BR was 88.0%, with a complete response rate of 20.5%. At 2 years, progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 69.9% and 96.2%, respectively.
A total of 51 patients (61.4%) experienced at least one grade 3 or 4 adverse event. The most common hematologic effects were neutropenia (40 patients), thrombocytopenia (14 patients), and anemia (8 patients). The most common nonhematologic effects were grade 3– or grade 4–level infections in 12 patients. Six patients developed severe skin rash.
Additionally, one patient developed sepsis during treatment and died after the first course of therapy.
“Age and CIRS failed to predict any severe toxicities or BR dose reduction,” the researchers noted.
The findings support data from previous studies and represent the largest study of CLL patients with significant comorbidities to be treated with BR, the researchers said.
More prospective research is needed, but the results demonstrate that “chemoimmunotherapy with BR is an effective therapeutic option with manageable toxicity for the initial treatment of CLL patients with significant comorbidities,” the investigators wrote.
The study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic, the Charles University Progres program, and the Czech CLL Study Group. Researchers reported honoraria and travel grants from Mundipharma and Roche.
SOURCE: Spacek M et al. Leuk Res. 2019;79:17-21.
A combination of bendamustine and rituximab generated an 88% overall response rate and 96% overall survival rate at 2 years among patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in a study of 83 patients aged 53-83 years.
Although combined fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab has demonstrated success in younger patients with CLL, this therapy is often considered too aggressive for the majority of CLL patients, who tend to be older and have multiple comorbidities, wrote Martin Špacek, MD, of Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague and his colleagues.
The alternative treatment combination of bendamustine and rituximab (BR) has not been well studied in patients with comorbidities, they said.
In a study published in Leukemia Research, the researchers enrolled 83 previously untreated adults with progressive CLL. The average age of the participants was 71 years, and 61% were men. The median creatinine clearance for the study population was 65 mL/min, and all patients had comorbidities, defined as scores greater than 6 on the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS).
All patients were prescribed 90 mg/m2 bendamustine on days 1 and 2 combined with 375 mg/m2 rituximab on day 0 of the first course, and 500 mg/m2 rituximab on day 1 during subsequent courses every 28 days for a maximum of six cycles.
The overall response rate to BR was 88.0%, with a complete response rate of 20.5%. At 2 years, progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 69.9% and 96.2%, respectively.
A total of 51 patients (61.4%) experienced at least one grade 3 or 4 adverse event. The most common hematologic effects were neutropenia (40 patients), thrombocytopenia (14 patients), and anemia (8 patients). The most common nonhematologic effects were grade 3– or grade 4–level infections in 12 patients. Six patients developed severe skin rash.
Additionally, one patient developed sepsis during treatment and died after the first course of therapy.
“Age and CIRS failed to predict any severe toxicities or BR dose reduction,” the researchers noted.
The findings support data from previous studies and represent the largest study of CLL patients with significant comorbidities to be treated with BR, the researchers said.
More prospective research is needed, but the results demonstrate that “chemoimmunotherapy with BR is an effective therapeutic option with manageable toxicity for the initial treatment of CLL patients with significant comorbidities,” the investigators wrote.
The study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic, the Charles University Progres program, and the Czech CLL Study Group. Researchers reported honoraria and travel grants from Mundipharma and Roche.
SOURCE: Spacek M et al. Leuk Res. 2019;79:17-21.
FROM LEUKEMIA RESEARCH
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The overall response rate for the combination therapy was 88.0%; complete response was 20.5%.
Study details: A prospective, observational study of 83 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
Disclosures: The study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic, the Charles University Progres program, and the Czech CLL Study Group. Researchers reported honoraria and travel grants from Mundipharma and Roche.
Source: Spacek M et al. Leuk Res. 2019;79:17-21.
Whole-genome sequencing demonstrates clinical relevance
GLASGOW – Whole genome sequencing (WGS) appears capable of replacing cytogenetic testing and next generation sequencing (NGS) for the detection of clinically relevant molecular abnormalities in hematological malignancies, according to investigators.
A comparison of WGS with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) showed that WGS caught all the same significant structural variants, plus some abnormalities that FISH had not detected, reported lead author Shirley Henderson, PhD, lead for cancer molecular diagnostics at Genomics England in Oxford.
Although further validation is needed, these findings, reported at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, support an ongoing effort to validate the clinical reliability of WGS, which is currently reserved for research purposes.
“It’s vitally important that the clinical community engage with this and understand both the power and the limitations of this technique and how this work is going to be interpreted for the benefit of patients,” said Adele Fielding, PhD, session chair from University College London’s Cancer Institute.
The investigators compared WGS with FISH for detection of clinically significant structural variants (SVs) and copy number variants (CNVs) in tumor samples from 34 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).
The 252 standard of care FISH tests – conducted at three separate clinical diagnostic centers in the United Kingdom – included 138 SVs and 114 CNVs. WGS relied on a combination of bioinformatics and visual inspection of Circos plots. WGS confirmed all of the SVs detected by FISH with high confidence; WGS detected four additional SVs, also with high confidence, including an ETV6-RUNX1 fusion not detected by FISH because of probe limitations.
Results for CNVs were similar, with WGS detecting 78 out of 85 positive CNVs. Six of the missed positives were associated with low quality samples or low level mutations in the FISH test, suggesting that at least some positives may have been detected with better samples. Only one negative CNV from FISH was missed by WGS.
Overall, WGS had a false positive rate of less than 5% and a positive percentage agreement with FISH that exceeded 90%.
“Further work is required to fully validate all aspects of the WGS analysis pipeline,” Dr. Henderson said. “But these results indicate that WGS has the potential to reliably detect SVs and CNVs in these conditions while offering the advantage of detecting all SVs and CNVs present without the need for additional interrogation of the sample by multiple tests or probes.”
Dr. Henderson noted that there is really no “perfect method” for identifying structural and copy number variants at the present time.
Small variants are relatively easy to detect with techniques such as karyotyping and gene banding, but these tests have shortcomings, namely, that they require live cells and have “fairly high failure rates for various reasons,” Dr. Henderson said.
“FISH is an incredibly useful test and it has higher resolution than gene banding, but the problem with FISH is that you only find what you’re looking at,” Dr. Henderson said. “It’s not genome wide; it’s very targeted.”
Similarly, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), including next generation sequencing (NGS), can detect molecular abnormalities, but only those that are targeted, which may necessitate multiple tests, she said.
“If you start looking for all of the structural variants [with existing techniques], then you’re going to be doing an awful lot of tests,” Dr. Henderson said.
Another potential benefit of WGS is that it is “future resistant,” Dr. Henderson said. “As new biomarkers are discovered, you don’t have to redesign a new targeted test. It will also detect emerging biomarkers, such as mutational signatures and burden.”
The study was sponsored by NHS England. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Henderson S et al. BSH 2019, Abstract OR-002.
GLASGOW – Whole genome sequencing (WGS) appears capable of replacing cytogenetic testing and next generation sequencing (NGS) for the detection of clinically relevant molecular abnormalities in hematological malignancies, according to investigators.
A comparison of WGS with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) showed that WGS caught all the same significant structural variants, plus some abnormalities that FISH had not detected, reported lead author Shirley Henderson, PhD, lead for cancer molecular diagnostics at Genomics England in Oxford.
Although further validation is needed, these findings, reported at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, support an ongoing effort to validate the clinical reliability of WGS, which is currently reserved for research purposes.
“It’s vitally important that the clinical community engage with this and understand both the power and the limitations of this technique and how this work is going to be interpreted for the benefit of patients,” said Adele Fielding, PhD, session chair from University College London’s Cancer Institute.
The investigators compared WGS with FISH for detection of clinically significant structural variants (SVs) and copy number variants (CNVs) in tumor samples from 34 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).
The 252 standard of care FISH tests – conducted at three separate clinical diagnostic centers in the United Kingdom – included 138 SVs and 114 CNVs. WGS relied on a combination of bioinformatics and visual inspection of Circos plots. WGS confirmed all of the SVs detected by FISH with high confidence; WGS detected four additional SVs, also with high confidence, including an ETV6-RUNX1 fusion not detected by FISH because of probe limitations.
Results for CNVs were similar, with WGS detecting 78 out of 85 positive CNVs. Six of the missed positives were associated with low quality samples or low level mutations in the FISH test, suggesting that at least some positives may have been detected with better samples. Only one negative CNV from FISH was missed by WGS.
Overall, WGS had a false positive rate of less than 5% and a positive percentage agreement with FISH that exceeded 90%.
“Further work is required to fully validate all aspects of the WGS analysis pipeline,” Dr. Henderson said. “But these results indicate that WGS has the potential to reliably detect SVs and CNVs in these conditions while offering the advantage of detecting all SVs and CNVs present without the need for additional interrogation of the sample by multiple tests or probes.”
Dr. Henderson noted that there is really no “perfect method” for identifying structural and copy number variants at the present time.
Small variants are relatively easy to detect with techniques such as karyotyping and gene banding, but these tests have shortcomings, namely, that they require live cells and have “fairly high failure rates for various reasons,” Dr. Henderson said.
“FISH is an incredibly useful test and it has higher resolution than gene banding, but the problem with FISH is that you only find what you’re looking at,” Dr. Henderson said. “It’s not genome wide; it’s very targeted.”
Similarly, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), including next generation sequencing (NGS), can detect molecular abnormalities, but only those that are targeted, which may necessitate multiple tests, she said.
“If you start looking for all of the structural variants [with existing techniques], then you’re going to be doing an awful lot of tests,” Dr. Henderson said.
Another potential benefit of WGS is that it is “future resistant,” Dr. Henderson said. “As new biomarkers are discovered, you don’t have to redesign a new targeted test. It will also detect emerging biomarkers, such as mutational signatures and burden.”
The study was sponsored by NHS England. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Henderson S et al. BSH 2019, Abstract OR-002.
GLASGOW – Whole genome sequencing (WGS) appears capable of replacing cytogenetic testing and next generation sequencing (NGS) for the detection of clinically relevant molecular abnormalities in hematological malignancies, according to investigators.
A comparison of WGS with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) showed that WGS caught all the same significant structural variants, plus some abnormalities that FISH had not detected, reported lead author Shirley Henderson, PhD, lead for cancer molecular diagnostics at Genomics England in Oxford.
Although further validation is needed, these findings, reported at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, support an ongoing effort to validate the clinical reliability of WGS, which is currently reserved for research purposes.
“It’s vitally important that the clinical community engage with this and understand both the power and the limitations of this technique and how this work is going to be interpreted for the benefit of patients,” said Adele Fielding, PhD, session chair from University College London’s Cancer Institute.
The investigators compared WGS with FISH for detection of clinically significant structural variants (SVs) and copy number variants (CNVs) in tumor samples from 34 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).
The 252 standard of care FISH tests – conducted at three separate clinical diagnostic centers in the United Kingdom – included 138 SVs and 114 CNVs. WGS relied on a combination of bioinformatics and visual inspection of Circos plots. WGS confirmed all of the SVs detected by FISH with high confidence; WGS detected four additional SVs, also with high confidence, including an ETV6-RUNX1 fusion not detected by FISH because of probe limitations.
Results for CNVs were similar, with WGS detecting 78 out of 85 positive CNVs. Six of the missed positives were associated with low quality samples or low level mutations in the FISH test, suggesting that at least some positives may have been detected with better samples. Only one negative CNV from FISH was missed by WGS.
Overall, WGS had a false positive rate of less than 5% and a positive percentage agreement with FISH that exceeded 90%.
“Further work is required to fully validate all aspects of the WGS analysis pipeline,” Dr. Henderson said. “But these results indicate that WGS has the potential to reliably detect SVs and CNVs in these conditions while offering the advantage of detecting all SVs and CNVs present without the need for additional interrogation of the sample by multiple tests or probes.”
Dr. Henderson noted that there is really no “perfect method” for identifying structural and copy number variants at the present time.
Small variants are relatively easy to detect with techniques such as karyotyping and gene banding, but these tests have shortcomings, namely, that they require live cells and have “fairly high failure rates for various reasons,” Dr. Henderson said.
“FISH is an incredibly useful test and it has higher resolution than gene banding, but the problem with FISH is that you only find what you’re looking at,” Dr. Henderson said. “It’s not genome wide; it’s very targeted.”
Similarly, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), including next generation sequencing (NGS), can detect molecular abnormalities, but only those that are targeted, which may necessitate multiple tests, she said.
“If you start looking for all of the structural variants [with existing techniques], then you’re going to be doing an awful lot of tests,” Dr. Henderson said.
Another potential benefit of WGS is that it is “future resistant,” Dr. Henderson said. “As new biomarkers are discovered, you don’t have to redesign a new targeted test. It will also detect emerging biomarkers, such as mutational signatures and burden.”
The study was sponsored by NHS England. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Henderson S et al. BSH 2019, Abstract OR-002.
REPORTING FROM BSH 2019
Ibrutinib sustained responses in refractory CLL in long-term follow-up
Prolonged exposure to ibrutinib showed sustained progression-free and overall survival and had tolerable safety outcomes in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, according to a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 RESONATE trial.
“This study ... provides further evidence for efficacy and safety with prolonged treatment across multiple high-risk genomic and clinical disease features and with increasing depth of response,” John C. Byrd, MD, of the Ohio State University, Columbus, and his colleagues wrote in Blood.
RESONATE included 391 high-risk patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Study participants were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to receive ibrutinib 420 mg daily or ofatumumab (initial infusion of 300 mg followed by seven weekly infusions and four monthly infusions of 2,000 mg) for a maximum of 24 weeks. Drug therapy was continued until cancer progression or intolerable toxicity of either agent was seen.
“Primary analysis at median follow-up of 9.7 months demonstrated superiority of ibrutinib over ofatumumab in PFS [progression-free survival], OS [overall survival], and overall response,” the researchers wrote. “With extended follow-up of median 44 months, these same results persist; a plateau of PFS has not yet been reached in this long-term follow-up. We also observe very durable remissions among patients of all genomic groups, including those with del(17)(p13.1), del(11)(q22.3), or unmutated IgHV [immunoglobulin heavy chain gene], who are traditionally considered high-risk populations.”
After an extended follow-up (median, 44 months), the team found that the PFS benefit with ibrutinib was sustained, compared with ofatumumab (hazard ratio, 0.133; 95% confidence interval, 0.099-0.178; P less than .0001). The 3-year PFS rate was 59% for ibrutinib, compared with 3% for ofatumumab. Similar PFS benefits were seen among subgroups of high- and very high–risk patients, based on their scores on the International Prognostic Index for CLL.
The OS benefit was also sustained in those randomized to ibrutinib (HR, 0.591; 95% CI, 0.378-0.926; P = .0208). The continued OS benefit with ibrutinib versus ofatumumab continued even after a sensitivity analysis adjusted for crossover of patients to ibrutinib.
With respect to safety, adverse events of any grade were similar to previous reports of ibrutinib. In fact, the prevalence of adverse events (grade 3 or higher) decreased over time for participants that continued on ibrutinib.
“Multiple studies are ongoing to investigate ibrutinib earlier in the course of CLL therapy, including phase 3 studies of first-line ibrutinib [or ibrutinib combined with anti-CD20 therapy], compared with standard chemoimmunotherapy regimens,” they wrote.
The study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics and Janssen. The authors reported financial disclosures related to the sponsors and several other companies.
SOURCE: Byrd JC et al. Blood. 2019 Mar 6. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-08-870238.
Prolonged exposure to ibrutinib showed sustained progression-free and overall survival and had tolerable safety outcomes in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, according to a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 RESONATE trial.
“This study ... provides further evidence for efficacy and safety with prolonged treatment across multiple high-risk genomic and clinical disease features and with increasing depth of response,” John C. Byrd, MD, of the Ohio State University, Columbus, and his colleagues wrote in Blood.
RESONATE included 391 high-risk patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Study participants were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to receive ibrutinib 420 mg daily or ofatumumab (initial infusion of 300 mg followed by seven weekly infusions and four monthly infusions of 2,000 mg) for a maximum of 24 weeks. Drug therapy was continued until cancer progression or intolerable toxicity of either agent was seen.
“Primary analysis at median follow-up of 9.7 months demonstrated superiority of ibrutinib over ofatumumab in PFS [progression-free survival], OS [overall survival], and overall response,” the researchers wrote. “With extended follow-up of median 44 months, these same results persist; a plateau of PFS has not yet been reached in this long-term follow-up. We also observe very durable remissions among patients of all genomic groups, including those with del(17)(p13.1), del(11)(q22.3), or unmutated IgHV [immunoglobulin heavy chain gene], who are traditionally considered high-risk populations.”
After an extended follow-up (median, 44 months), the team found that the PFS benefit with ibrutinib was sustained, compared with ofatumumab (hazard ratio, 0.133; 95% confidence interval, 0.099-0.178; P less than .0001). The 3-year PFS rate was 59% for ibrutinib, compared with 3% for ofatumumab. Similar PFS benefits were seen among subgroups of high- and very high–risk patients, based on their scores on the International Prognostic Index for CLL.
The OS benefit was also sustained in those randomized to ibrutinib (HR, 0.591; 95% CI, 0.378-0.926; P = .0208). The continued OS benefit with ibrutinib versus ofatumumab continued even after a sensitivity analysis adjusted for crossover of patients to ibrutinib.
With respect to safety, adverse events of any grade were similar to previous reports of ibrutinib. In fact, the prevalence of adverse events (grade 3 or higher) decreased over time for participants that continued on ibrutinib.
“Multiple studies are ongoing to investigate ibrutinib earlier in the course of CLL therapy, including phase 3 studies of first-line ibrutinib [or ibrutinib combined with anti-CD20 therapy], compared with standard chemoimmunotherapy regimens,” they wrote.
The study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics and Janssen. The authors reported financial disclosures related to the sponsors and several other companies.
SOURCE: Byrd JC et al. Blood. 2019 Mar 6. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-08-870238.
Prolonged exposure to ibrutinib showed sustained progression-free and overall survival and had tolerable safety outcomes in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, according to a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 RESONATE trial.
“This study ... provides further evidence for efficacy and safety with prolonged treatment across multiple high-risk genomic and clinical disease features and with increasing depth of response,” John C. Byrd, MD, of the Ohio State University, Columbus, and his colleagues wrote in Blood.
RESONATE included 391 high-risk patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Study participants were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to receive ibrutinib 420 mg daily or ofatumumab (initial infusion of 300 mg followed by seven weekly infusions and four monthly infusions of 2,000 mg) for a maximum of 24 weeks. Drug therapy was continued until cancer progression or intolerable toxicity of either agent was seen.
“Primary analysis at median follow-up of 9.7 months demonstrated superiority of ibrutinib over ofatumumab in PFS [progression-free survival], OS [overall survival], and overall response,” the researchers wrote. “With extended follow-up of median 44 months, these same results persist; a plateau of PFS has not yet been reached in this long-term follow-up. We also observe very durable remissions among patients of all genomic groups, including those with del(17)(p13.1), del(11)(q22.3), or unmutated IgHV [immunoglobulin heavy chain gene], who are traditionally considered high-risk populations.”
After an extended follow-up (median, 44 months), the team found that the PFS benefit with ibrutinib was sustained, compared with ofatumumab (hazard ratio, 0.133; 95% confidence interval, 0.099-0.178; P less than .0001). The 3-year PFS rate was 59% for ibrutinib, compared with 3% for ofatumumab. Similar PFS benefits were seen among subgroups of high- and very high–risk patients, based on their scores on the International Prognostic Index for CLL.
The OS benefit was also sustained in those randomized to ibrutinib (HR, 0.591; 95% CI, 0.378-0.926; P = .0208). The continued OS benefit with ibrutinib versus ofatumumab continued even after a sensitivity analysis adjusted for crossover of patients to ibrutinib.
With respect to safety, adverse events of any grade were similar to previous reports of ibrutinib. In fact, the prevalence of adverse events (grade 3 or higher) decreased over time for participants that continued on ibrutinib.
“Multiple studies are ongoing to investigate ibrutinib earlier in the course of CLL therapy, including phase 3 studies of first-line ibrutinib [or ibrutinib combined with anti-CD20 therapy], compared with standard chemoimmunotherapy regimens,” they wrote.
The study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics and Janssen. The authors reported financial disclosures related to the sponsors and several other companies.
SOURCE: Byrd JC et al. Blood. 2019 Mar 6. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-08-870238.
FROM BLOOD
Venetoclax and obinutuzumab induces deep responses in CLL
The combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab provided high response rates and deep remissions regardless of cytogenetic risk factors in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, according to recently reported results of a phase 1b study.
The regimen elicited high rates of undetectable minimal residual disease in peripheral blood and had an acceptable safety profile with manageable toxicities in the study reported in Blood, which included patients with previously untreated or relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
“The deep remission rates we observed with venetoclax-obinutuzumab have not been reported with previously available CLL treatments, including FCR [fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab], which is currently considered the most efficacious regimen with limited-duration therapy,” wrote the investigators, led by Ian W. Flinn, MD, PhD, of Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology, Nashville.
Venetoclax-obinutuzumab combinations are meanwhile being tested in other studies – including the phase 3 CLL13 and CLL14 studies – which have enrolled previously untreated fit or unfit CLL patients, respectively.
“If the primary endpoints of these large-scale trials are met, venetoclax-obinutuzumab may become a new standard treatment option in [first-line] CLL, irrespective of clinical fitness,” Dr. Flinn and his colleagues wrote in their report.
The present phase 1b, dose-escalation study enrolled 32 patients who were previously untreated (median age, 63 years) and 46 patients who were relapsed or refractory to previous treatments (median age, 61 years).
Doses of venetoclax were escalated from 100 mg to 400 mg to determine its maximum tolerated dose when combined with obinutuzumab, the investigators wrote. Some patients received venetoclax first, while others received obinutuzumab first, for a total of 1 year of treatment.
The study confirmed favorable risk-benefit treatment used a dose of 400 mg venetoclax plus the standard dose of obinutuzumab, according to the researchers.
The overall best response rate was 95% for relapsed/refractory patients, including a 37% rate of complete response or complete response with incomplete marrow recovery. In previously untreated patients, the overall best response rate was 100%, including a 78% rate of complete responses by those criteria.
Undetectable minimal residual disease was observed in 64% of relapsed/refractory patients and 91% of previously untreated patients at 3 months after the last obinutuzumab dose, the investigators reported.
There were no dose-limiting toxicities in the study, no clinical tumor lysis syndrome, and no differences between the two schedules (venetoclax first or obinutuzumab first) in terms of adverse events, the investigators wrote.
Neutropenia was the most common serious (grade 3-4) adverse event, occurring in 58% of relapsed/refractory patients and 53% of patients treated in the first line. Grade 3-4 infections were seen in 29% and 13% of the relapsed/refractory and previously untreated patients, respectively.
There were no fatal infections among previously untreated patients, while three relapsed/refractory patients (7%) had fatal adverse events, including one case of acute respiratory failure in a patient with suspected Richter’s transformation, pneumonia in a patient with metastatic squamous cell lung carcinoma, and another case of pneumonia occurring about 3 months after the last dose of venetoclax.
Genentech and AbbVie provided financial support for the study. Dr. Flinn reported receiving research funding for his institution from Genentech, AbbVie, and several other companies.
SOURCE: Flinn IW et al. Blood. 2019 Mar 12. doi: 10.1182/blood-2019-01-896290.
The combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab provided high response rates and deep remissions regardless of cytogenetic risk factors in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, according to recently reported results of a phase 1b study.
The regimen elicited high rates of undetectable minimal residual disease in peripheral blood and had an acceptable safety profile with manageable toxicities in the study reported in Blood, which included patients with previously untreated or relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
“The deep remission rates we observed with venetoclax-obinutuzumab have not been reported with previously available CLL treatments, including FCR [fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab], which is currently considered the most efficacious regimen with limited-duration therapy,” wrote the investigators, led by Ian W. Flinn, MD, PhD, of Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology, Nashville.
Venetoclax-obinutuzumab combinations are meanwhile being tested in other studies – including the phase 3 CLL13 and CLL14 studies – which have enrolled previously untreated fit or unfit CLL patients, respectively.
“If the primary endpoints of these large-scale trials are met, venetoclax-obinutuzumab may become a new standard treatment option in [first-line] CLL, irrespective of clinical fitness,” Dr. Flinn and his colleagues wrote in their report.
The present phase 1b, dose-escalation study enrolled 32 patients who were previously untreated (median age, 63 years) and 46 patients who were relapsed or refractory to previous treatments (median age, 61 years).
Doses of venetoclax were escalated from 100 mg to 400 mg to determine its maximum tolerated dose when combined with obinutuzumab, the investigators wrote. Some patients received venetoclax first, while others received obinutuzumab first, for a total of 1 year of treatment.
The study confirmed favorable risk-benefit treatment used a dose of 400 mg venetoclax plus the standard dose of obinutuzumab, according to the researchers.
The overall best response rate was 95% for relapsed/refractory patients, including a 37% rate of complete response or complete response with incomplete marrow recovery. In previously untreated patients, the overall best response rate was 100%, including a 78% rate of complete responses by those criteria.
Undetectable minimal residual disease was observed in 64% of relapsed/refractory patients and 91% of previously untreated patients at 3 months after the last obinutuzumab dose, the investigators reported.
There were no dose-limiting toxicities in the study, no clinical tumor lysis syndrome, and no differences between the two schedules (venetoclax first or obinutuzumab first) in terms of adverse events, the investigators wrote.
Neutropenia was the most common serious (grade 3-4) adverse event, occurring in 58% of relapsed/refractory patients and 53% of patients treated in the first line. Grade 3-4 infections were seen in 29% and 13% of the relapsed/refractory and previously untreated patients, respectively.
There were no fatal infections among previously untreated patients, while three relapsed/refractory patients (7%) had fatal adverse events, including one case of acute respiratory failure in a patient with suspected Richter’s transformation, pneumonia in a patient with metastatic squamous cell lung carcinoma, and another case of pneumonia occurring about 3 months after the last dose of venetoclax.
Genentech and AbbVie provided financial support for the study. Dr. Flinn reported receiving research funding for his institution from Genentech, AbbVie, and several other companies.
SOURCE: Flinn IW et al. Blood. 2019 Mar 12. doi: 10.1182/blood-2019-01-896290.
The combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab provided high response rates and deep remissions regardless of cytogenetic risk factors in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, according to recently reported results of a phase 1b study.
The regimen elicited high rates of undetectable minimal residual disease in peripheral blood and had an acceptable safety profile with manageable toxicities in the study reported in Blood, which included patients with previously untreated or relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
“The deep remission rates we observed with venetoclax-obinutuzumab have not been reported with previously available CLL treatments, including FCR [fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab], which is currently considered the most efficacious regimen with limited-duration therapy,” wrote the investigators, led by Ian W. Flinn, MD, PhD, of Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology, Nashville.
Venetoclax-obinutuzumab combinations are meanwhile being tested in other studies – including the phase 3 CLL13 and CLL14 studies – which have enrolled previously untreated fit or unfit CLL patients, respectively.
“If the primary endpoints of these large-scale trials are met, venetoclax-obinutuzumab may become a new standard treatment option in [first-line] CLL, irrespective of clinical fitness,” Dr. Flinn and his colleagues wrote in their report.
The present phase 1b, dose-escalation study enrolled 32 patients who were previously untreated (median age, 63 years) and 46 patients who were relapsed or refractory to previous treatments (median age, 61 years).
Doses of venetoclax were escalated from 100 mg to 400 mg to determine its maximum tolerated dose when combined with obinutuzumab, the investigators wrote. Some patients received venetoclax first, while others received obinutuzumab first, for a total of 1 year of treatment.
The study confirmed favorable risk-benefit treatment used a dose of 400 mg venetoclax plus the standard dose of obinutuzumab, according to the researchers.
The overall best response rate was 95% for relapsed/refractory patients, including a 37% rate of complete response or complete response with incomplete marrow recovery. In previously untreated patients, the overall best response rate was 100%, including a 78% rate of complete responses by those criteria.
Undetectable minimal residual disease was observed in 64% of relapsed/refractory patients and 91% of previously untreated patients at 3 months after the last obinutuzumab dose, the investigators reported.
There were no dose-limiting toxicities in the study, no clinical tumor lysis syndrome, and no differences between the two schedules (venetoclax first or obinutuzumab first) in terms of adverse events, the investigators wrote.
Neutropenia was the most common serious (grade 3-4) adverse event, occurring in 58% of relapsed/refractory patients and 53% of patients treated in the first line. Grade 3-4 infections were seen in 29% and 13% of the relapsed/refractory and previously untreated patients, respectively.
There were no fatal infections among previously untreated patients, while three relapsed/refractory patients (7%) had fatal adverse events, including one case of acute respiratory failure in a patient with suspected Richter’s transformation, pneumonia in a patient with metastatic squamous cell lung carcinoma, and another case of pneumonia occurring about 3 months after the last dose of venetoclax.
Genentech and AbbVie provided financial support for the study. Dr. Flinn reported receiving research funding for his institution from Genentech, AbbVie, and several other companies.
SOURCE: Flinn IW et al. Blood. 2019 Mar 12. doi: 10.1182/blood-2019-01-896290.
FROM BLOOD
MRD status at transplant predicts outcomes in ALL patients
HOUSTON – Acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients with measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity prior to hematopoietic cell transplantation achieve better outcomes than do those who are MRD positive, particularly when total body irradiation (TBI)–based conditioning is used, a large retrospective study suggests.
Of 2,780 ALL patients who underwent hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in first or second complete remission (CR), and who were included in the study, 1,816 were MRD negative before transplantation and 964 were MRD positive.
Overall, with follow-up of 40-44 months, MRD positivity was a significant independent predictor of lower overall survival (OS; hazard ratio, 1.19), leukemia-free survival (LFS; HR, 1.26), and higher relapse incidence (RI; 1.51), Arnon Nagler, MD, reported at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.
Conditioning was TBI-based in 76% of the patients; when these patients were compared with those who received chemotherapy-based conditioning, they were found to have better OS, LFS, and RI (HRs, 0.75, 0.70, and 0.60, respectively), said Dr. Nagler, director of both the division of hematology and the bone marrow transplantation and cord blood bank at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, and professor of medicine at Tel Aviv University, both in Israel.
“There was no significant interaction between the MRD status and the conditioning,” he said.
On multivariate analysis, MRD positivity was found to be associated with lower OS and LFS (HRs, 1.26 and 1.3), and higher RI (HR, 1.53) in the TBI group, and with higher RI (HR 1.58) in the chemotherapy group, he said. There was no significant association between MRD and other outcomes in this last cohort, he added, noting that TBI-based conditioning was associated with improved OS, LFS, and RI in both MRD-negative and MRD-positive patients.
“MRD is an extremely important prognostic factor for ALL,” he said, noting that its prognostic value in this setting has been established in multiple studies, and that MRD measured at the end of induction is increasingly used to guide further therapy.
However, although MRD detectable immediately before HCT is known to be associated with poor outcomes, it has been unclear if – or to what extent – this differs with different types of conditioning, he added.
“So the aim of this study was to explore if MRD detectable before allogeneic HCT for ALL is associated with different outcomes in adult patients receiving myeloablative conditioning, either TBI or chemotherapy based,” he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research.
At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).
Patients included in the analysis had a median age of 38 years and underwent HCT between 2000 and 2017 using sibling or unrelated 9/10 or 10/10 matched donors. None received blinatumomab or inotuzumab, Dr. Nagler said, adding that more patients are likely to achieve MRD negativity with these agents.
It will be interesting to see if the prognostic value of MRD will remain as strong with the new agents, and if TBI will be “a strong factor in overall survival and disease-free survival” with modern immunotherapy, he concluded.
The study was conducted on behalf of the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT).
Dr. Nagler reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Nagler A et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 7.
HOUSTON – Acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients with measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity prior to hematopoietic cell transplantation achieve better outcomes than do those who are MRD positive, particularly when total body irradiation (TBI)–based conditioning is used, a large retrospective study suggests.
Of 2,780 ALL patients who underwent hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in first or second complete remission (CR), and who were included in the study, 1,816 were MRD negative before transplantation and 964 were MRD positive.
Overall, with follow-up of 40-44 months, MRD positivity was a significant independent predictor of lower overall survival (OS; hazard ratio, 1.19), leukemia-free survival (LFS; HR, 1.26), and higher relapse incidence (RI; 1.51), Arnon Nagler, MD, reported at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.
Conditioning was TBI-based in 76% of the patients; when these patients were compared with those who received chemotherapy-based conditioning, they were found to have better OS, LFS, and RI (HRs, 0.75, 0.70, and 0.60, respectively), said Dr. Nagler, director of both the division of hematology and the bone marrow transplantation and cord blood bank at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, and professor of medicine at Tel Aviv University, both in Israel.
“There was no significant interaction between the MRD status and the conditioning,” he said.
On multivariate analysis, MRD positivity was found to be associated with lower OS and LFS (HRs, 1.26 and 1.3), and higher RI (HR, 1.53) in the TBI group, and with higher RI (HR 1.58) in the chemotherapy group, he said. There was no significant association between MRD and other outcomes in this last cohort, he added, noting that TBI-based conditioning was associated with improved OS, LFS, and RI in both MRD-negative and MRD-positive patients.
“MRD is an extremely important prognostic factor for ALL,” he said, noting that its prognostic value in this setting has been established in multiple studies, and that MRD measured at the end of induction is increasingly used to guide further therapy.
However, although MRD detectable immediately before HCT is known to be associated with poor outcomes, it has been unclear if – or to what extent – this differs with different types of conditioning, he added.
“So the aim of this study was to explore if MRD detectable before allogeneic HCT for ALL is associated with different outcomes in adult patients receiving myeloablative conditioning, either TBI or chemotherapy based,” he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research.
At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).
Patients included in the analysis had a median age of 38 years and underwent HCT between 2000 and 2017 using sibling or unrelated 9/10 or 10/10 matched donors. None received blinatumomab or inotuzumab, Dr. Nagler said, adding that more patients are likely to achieve MRD negativity with these agents.
It will be interesting to see if the prognostic value of MRD will remain as strong with the new agents, and if TBI will be “a strong factor in overall survival and disease-free survival” with modern immunotherapy, he concluded.
The study was conducted on behalf of the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT).
Dr. Nagler reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Nagler A et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 7.
HOUSTON – Acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients with measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity prior to hematopoietic cell transplantation achieve better outcomes than do those who are MRD positive, particularly when total body irradiation (TBI)–based conditioning is used, a large retrospective study suggests.
Of 2,780 ALL patients who underwent hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in first or second complete remission (CR), and who were included in the study, 1,816 were MRD negative before transplantation and 964 were MRD positive.
Overall, with follow-up of 40-44 months, MRD positivity was a significant independent predictor of lower overall survival (OS; hazard ratio, 1.19), leukemia-free survival (LFS; HR, 1.26), and higher relapse incidence (RI; 1.51), Arnon Nagler, MD, reported at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.
Conditioning was TBI-based in 76% of the patients; when these patients were compared with those who received chemotherapy-based conditioning, they were found to have better OS, LFS, and RI (HRs, 0.75, 0.70, and 0.60, respectively), said Dr. Nagler, director of both the division of hematology and the bone marrow transplantation and cord blood bank at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, and professor of medicine at Tel Aviv University, both in Israel.
“There was no significant interaction between the MRD status and the conditioning,” he said.
On multivariate analysis, MRD positivity was found to be associated with lower OS and LFS (HRs, 1.26 and 1.3), and higher RI (HR, 1.53) in the TBI group, and with higher RI (HR 1.58) in the chemotherapy group, he said. There was no significant association between MRD and other outcomes in this last cohort, he added, noting that TBI-based conditioning was associated with improved OS, LFS, and RI in both MRD-negative and MRD-positive patients.
“MRD is an extremely important prognostic factor for ALL,” he said, noting that its prognostic value in this setting has been established in multiple studies, and that MRD measured at the end of induction is increasingly used to guide further therapy.
However, although MRD detectable immediately before HCT is known to be associated with poor outcomes, it has been unclear if – or to what extent – this differs with different types of conditioning, he added.
“So the aim of this study was to explore if MRD detectable before allogeneic HCT for ALL is associated with different outcomes in adult patients receiving myeloablative conditioning, either TBI or chemotherapy based,” he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research.
At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).
Patients included in the analysis had a median age of 38 years and underwent HCT between 2000 and 2017 using sibling or unrelated 9/10 or 10/10 matched donors. None received blinatumomab or inotuzumab, Dr. Nagler said, adding that more patients are likely to achieve MRD negativity with these agents.
It will be interesting to see if the prognostic value of MRD will remain as strong with the new agents, and if TBI will be “a strong factor in overall survival and disease-free survival” with modern immunotherapy, he concluded.
The study was conducted on behalf of the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT).
Dr. Nagler reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Nagler A et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 7.
REPORTING FROM TCT 2019
Secondary AML in first remission predicts outcomes
HOUSTON – Secondary acute myeloid leukemia (sAML) predicts outcomes after stem cell transplantation in first complete remission, whereas factors such as age, cytogenetics, and performance status are more relevant predictors of outcomes in patients with de novo AML, according to a large, registry-based analysis.
Of 11,439 patients with de novo AML and 1,325 with sAML identified in the registry, 7,691 and 909, respectively, underwent a stem cell transplant (SCT) in first complete remission (CR1), Bipin Savani, MD, said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapies Meetings.
The 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) rates in those who underwent SCT in CR1 were higher in the sAML versus de novo AML groups (35% vs. 28.5% for CIR and 23.4% vs. 16.4% for NRM, respectively), said Dr. Savani, professor of medicine, director of the Long-Term Transplant Clinic, and medical director of the Stem Cell Transplant Processing Laboratory at Vanderbilt University Medical Center & Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
The 3-year overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and graft-versus-host disease/relapse-free survival (GRFS) were significantly lower in the sAML group versus the de novo AML group (46.7% vs. 60.8% for OS; 41.6% vs. 55.1% for LFS; and 28.4% vs. 28.6% for GRFS).
Multivariate analysis controlling for risk factors and stratified by disease stage at SCT showed that sAML in CR1 was significantly associated with higher NRM (hazard ratio, 1.32) and CIR (HR, 1.28), and with lower LFS (HR, 1.30), OS (HR, 1.32) and GRFS (HR, 1.20).
Other significant predictors of OS in the model were age, cytogenetics, patient/donor sex combination, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), and donor, he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).
In the patients who underwent SCT for primary refractory AML (607 with de novo AML and 199 with sAML) or relapsed AML (1,009 with de novo AML and 124 with sAML), the outcomes were generally inferior to those seen with SCT in CR1. However, sAML in those patients did not predict outcomes, Dr. Savani said, noting that outcome in those cases were predicted by age, cytogenetics, and KPS.
In an analysis of 877 pairs matched for age, disease stage at SCT, KPS, conditioning, in vivo/ex vivo T-cell depletion, donor, donor/recipient sex and cytomegalovirus-status combination, cytogenetics, and graft source, the finding that sAML was associated with significantly higher NRM, and lower LFS, OS, and GRFS overall was confirmed.
However, stratification by stage at the time of SCT again showed that the differences between groups were only seen among those transplanted in CR1, and not in those with advanced disease at the time of transplant.
Patients included in the study were adults aged 18 years and older who underwent SCT for de novo or sAML from a matched related, unrelated, or T-cell replete haploidentical donor between 2000 and 2016.
The findings confirm the general belief that the prognosis in AML secondary to another hematologic neoplasia or malignant disease is poorer than that for de novo AML, and clarify the role of this difference for SCT, Dr. Savani said.
“These data may help to improve risk stratification and prognostic estimates after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia,” he concluded.
Dr. Savani reported having no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Savani B et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 12.
HOUSTON – Secondary acute myeloid leukemia (sAML) predicts outcomes after stem cell transplantation in first complete remission, whereas factors such as age, cytogenetics, and performance status are more relevant predictors of outcomes in patients with de novo AML, according to a large, registry-based analysis.
Of 11,439 patients with de novo AML and 1,325 with sAML identified in the registry, 7,691 and 909, respectively, underwent a stem cell transplant (SCT) in first complete remission (CR1), Bipin Savani, MD, said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapies Meetings.
The 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) rates in those who underwent SCT in CR1 were higher in the sAML versus de novo AML groups (35% vs. 28.5% for CIR and 23.4% vs. 16.4% for NRM, respectively), said Dr. Savani, professor of medicine, director of the Long-Term Transplant Clinic, and medical director of the Stem Cell Transplant Processing Laboratory at Vanderbilt University Medical Center & Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
The 3-year overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and graft-versus-host disease/relapse-free survival (GRFS) were significantly lower in the sAML group versus the de novo AML group (46.7% vs. 60.8% for OS; 41.6% vs. 55.1% for LFS; and 28.4% vs. 28.6% for GRFS).
Multivariate analysis controlling for risk factors and stratified by disease stage at SCT showed that sAML in CR1 was significantly associated with higher NRM (hazard ratio, 1.32) and CIR (HR, 1.28), and with lower LFS (HR, 1.30), OS (HR, 1.32) and GRFS (HR, 1.20).
Other significant predictors of OS in the model were age, cytogenetics, patient/donor sex combination, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), and donor, he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).
In the patients who underwent SCT for primary refractory AML (607 with de novo AML and 199 with sAML) or relapsed AML (1,009 with de novo AML and 124 with sAML), the outcomes were generally inferior to those seen with SCT in CR1. However, sAML in those patients did not predict outcomes, Dr. Savani said, noting that outcome in those cases were predicted by age, cytogenetics, and KPS.
In an analysis of 877 pairs matched for age, disease stage at SCT, KPS, conditioning, in vivo/ex vivo T-cell depletion, donor, donor/recipient sex and cytomegalovirus-status combination, cytogenetics, and graft source, the finding that sAML was associated with significantly higher NRM, and lower LFS, OS, and GRFS overall was confirmed.
However, stratification by stage at the time of SCT again showed that the differences between groups were only seen among those transplanted in CR1, and not in those with advanced disease at the time of transplant.
Patients included in the study were adults aged 18 years and older who underwent SCT for de novo or sAML from a matched related, unrelated, or T-cell replete haploidentical donor between 2000 and 2016.
The findings confirm the general belief that the prognosis in AML secondary to another hematologic neoplasia or malignant disease is poorer than that for de novo AML, and clarify the role of this difference for SCT, Dr. Savani said.
“These data may help to improve risk stratification and prognostic estimates after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia,” he concluded.
Dr. Savani reported having no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Savani B et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 12.
HOUSTON – Secondary acute myeloid leukemia (sAML) predicts outcomes after stem cell transplantation in first complete remission, whereas factors such as age, cytogenetics, and performance status are more relevant predictors of outcomes in patients with de novo AML, according to a large, registry-based analysis.
Of 11,439 patients with de novo AML and 1,325 with sAML identified in the registry, 7,691 and 909, respectively, underwent a stem cell transplant (SCT) in first complete remission (CR1), Bipin Savani, MD, said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapies Meetings.
The 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) rates in those who underwent SCT in CR1 were higher in the sAML versus de novo AML groups (35% vs. 28.5% for CIR and 23.4% vs. 16.4% for NRM, respectively), said Dr. Savani, professor of medicine, director of the Long-Term Transplant Clinic, and medical director of the Stem Cell Transplant Processing Laboratory at Vanderbilt University Medical Center & Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
The 3-year overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and graft-versus-host disease/relapse-free survival (GRFS) were significantly lower in the sAML group versus the de novo AML group (46.7% vs. 60.8% for OS; 41.6% vs. 55.1% for LFS; and 28.4% vs. 28.6% for GRFS).
Multivariate analysis controlling for risk factors and stratified by disease stage at SCT showed that sAML in CR1 was significantly associated with higher NRM (hazard ratio, 1.32) and CIR (HR, 1.28), and with lower LFS (HR, 1.30), OS (HR, 1.32) and GRFS (HR, 1.20).
Other significant predictors of OS in the model were age, cytogenetics, patient/donor sex combination, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), and donor, he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).
In the patients who underwent SCT for primary refractory AML (607 with de novo AML and 199 with sAML) or relapsed AML (1,009 with de novo AML and 124 with sAML), the outcomes were generally inferior to those seen with SCT in CR1. However, sAML in those patients did not predict outcomes, Dr. Savani said, noting that outcome in those cases were predicted by age, cytogenetics, and KPS.
In an analysis of 877 pairs matched for age, disease stage at SCT, KPS, conditioning, in vivo/ex vivo T-cell depletion, donor, donor/recipient sex and cytomegalovirus-status combination, cytogenetics, and graft source, the finding that sAML was associated with significantly higher NRM, and lower LFS, OS, and GRFS overall was confirmed.
However, stratification by stage at the time of SCT again showed that the differences between groups were only seen among those transplanted in CR1, and not in those with advanced disease at the time of transplant.
Patients included in the study were adults aged 18 years and older who underwent SCT for de novo or sAML from a matched related, unrelated, or T-cell replete haploidentical donor between 2000 and 2016.
The findings confirm the general belief that the prognosis in AML secondary to another hematologic neoplasia or malignant disease is poorer than that for de novo AML, and clarify the role of this difference for SCT, Dr. Savani said.
“These data may help to improve risk stratification and prognostic estimates after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia,” he concluded.
Dr. Savani reported having no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Savani B et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 12.
REPORTING FROM TCT 2019
Haplo-HSCT bests chemotherapy for MRD-positive adult ALL
HOUSTON – Haploidentical stem cell transplantation (Haplo-HSCT) outperforms chemotherapy for the treatment of adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in first complete remission, findings from a prospective multicenter trial suggest.
The 2-year leukemia-free survival (LFS) was about 70% in 49 patients in first remission who received haplo-HSCT vs. 40% in 40 patients who received chemotherapy, and 2-year overall survival (OS) was about 80% vs. 50% in the groups, respectively, Meng Lv, MD, PhD, of Peking University People’s Hospital in Beijing reported at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.
“This result is comparable to results of our previous reports,” he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research.
He noted that the findings also support those from other institutions.
Study subjects initially included 112 newly diagnosed standard-risk ALL patients aged 18-39 years without high-risk features who achieved complete remission (CR) after one or two cycles of induction. They were consecutively enrolled at five centers in China, including high-volume centers, between July 2014 and June 2017 and were followed for a median of 24.6 months.
Subjects without a suitable HLA-matched sibling donor (MSD) or HLA-matched unrelated donor after two cycles of consolidation with hyper-CVAD chemotherapy were eligible for haplo-HSCT or further hyper-CVAD chemotherapy.
The final analysis included 89 patients after 23 were excluded because of early relapse (6 patients) or a decision to undergo MSD HSCT (16 patients), or unrelated donor-HSCT (1 patient), Dr. Lv said, noting that landmark analysis was used when comparing the outcomes of patients receiving haplo-HSCT with those receiving chemotherapy.
Multivariate analysis with adjustment for a propensity score calculated for each patient showed that treatment (haplo-HSCT vs. chemotherapy) independently predicted LFS (hazard ratio, 0.388), OS (HR, 0.346), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR; HR, 0.247). Minimal residual disease (MRD) positivity after the first consolidation was an independent risk factor for LFS (HR, 2.162) and CIR (HR, 3.667). Additionally, diagnosis (T- vs. B-cell) was an independent risk factor for OS (HR, 2.267), Dr. Lv said, adding that nonrelapse mortality was similar in the groups in the propensity score–adjusted analysis.
The findings overall show that haplo-HSCT has variable impact on survival in standard-risk ALL, when compared with traditional chemotherapy, with subgroup analyses showing MRD-positive patients deriving the greatest benefit, he said. Future studies are planned to look more closely at MRD-positive disease and the possible benefits of postponing transplant until the second CR.
At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).
Dr. Lv reported having no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Lv M et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 8.
HOUSTON – Haploidentical stem cell transplantation (Haplo-HSCT) outperforms chemotherapy for the treatment of adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in first complete remission, findings from a prospective multicenter trial suggest.
The 2-year leukemia-free survival (LFS) was about 70% in 49 patients in first remission who received haplo-HSCT vs. 40% in 40 patients who received chemotherapy, and 2-year overall survival (OS) was about 80% vs. 50% in the groups, respectively, Meng Lv, MD, PhD, of Peking University People’s Hospital in Beijing reported at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.
“This result is comparable to results of our previous reports,” he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research.
He noted that the findings also support those from other institutions.
Study subjects initially included 112 newly diagnosed standard-risk ALL patients aged 18-39 years without high-risk features who achieved complete remission (CR) after one or two cycles of induction. They were consecutively enrolled at five centers in China, including high-volume centers, between July 2014 and June 2017 and were followed for a median of 24.6 months.
Subjects without a suitable HLA-matched sibling donor (MSD) or HLA-matched unrelated donor after two cycles of consolidation with hyper-CVAD chemotherapy were eligible for haplo-HSCT or further hyper-CVAD chemotherapy.
The final analysis included 89 patients after 23 were excluded because of early relapse (6 patients) or a decision to undergo MSD HSCT (16 patients), or unrelated donor-HSCT (1 patient), Dr. Lv said, noting that landmark analysis was used when comparing the outcomes of patients receiving haplo-HSCT with those receiving chemotherapy.
Multivariate analysis with adjustment for a propensity score calculated for each patient showed that treatment (haplo-HSCT vs. chemotherapy) independently predicted LFS (hazard ratio, 0.388), OS (HR, 0.346), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR; HR, 0.247). Minimal residual disease (MRD) positivity after the first consolidation was an independent risk factor for LFS (HR, 2.162) and CIR (HR, 3.667). Additionally, diagnosis (T- vs. B-cell) was an independent risk factor for OS (HR, 2.267), Dr. Lv said, adding that nonrelapse mortality was similar in the groups in the propensity score–adjusted analysis.
The findings overall show that haplo-HSCT has variable impact on survival in standard-risk ALL, when compared with traditional chemotherapy, with subgroup analyses showing MRD-positive patients deriving the greatest benefit, he said. Future studies are planned to look more closely at MRD-positive disease and the possible benefits of postponing transplant until the second CR.
At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).
Dr. Lv reported having no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Lv M et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 8.
HOUSTON – Haploidentical stem cell transplantation (Haplo-HSCT) outperforms chemotherapy for the treatment of adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in first complete remission, findings from a prospective multicenter trial suggest.
The 2-year leukemia-free survival (LFS) was about 70% in 49 patients in first remission who received haplo-HSCT vs. 40% in 40 patients who received chemotherapy, and 2-year overall survival (OS) was about 80% vs. 50% in the groups, respectively, Meng Lv, MD, PhD, of Peking University People’s Hospital in Beijing reported at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.
“This result is comparable to results of our previous reports,” he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research.
He noted that the findings also support those from other institutions.
Study subjects initially included 112 newly diagnosed standard-risk ALL patients aged 18-39 years without high-risk features who achieved complete remission (CR) after one or two cycles of induction. They were consecutively enrolled at five centers in China, including high-volume centers, between July 2014 and June 2017 and were followed for a median of 24.6 months.
Subjects without a suitable HLA-matched sibling donor (MSD) or HLA-matched unrelated donor after two cycles of consolidation with hyper-CVAD chemotherapy were eligible for haplo-HSCT or further hyper-CVAD chemotherapy.
The final analysis included 89 patients after 23 were excluded because of early relapse (6 patients) or a decision to undergo MSD HSCT (16 patients), or unrelated donor-HSCT (1 patient), Dr. Lv said, noting that landmark analysis was used when comparing the outcomes of patients receiving haplo-HSCT with those receiving chemotherapy.
Multivariate analysis with adjustment for a propensity score calculated for each patient showed that treatment (haplo-HSCT vs. chemotherapy) independently predicted LFS (hazard ratio, 0.388), OS (HR, 0.346), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR; HR, 0.247). Minimal residual disease (MRD) positivity after the first consolidation was an independent risk factor for LFS (HR, 2.162) and CIR (HR, 3.667). Additionally, diagnosis (T- vs. B-cell) was an independent risk factor for OS (HR, 2.267), Dr. Lv said, adding that nonrelapse mortality was similar in the groups in the propensity score–adjusted analysis.
The findings overall show that haplo-HSCT has variable impact on survival in standard-risk ALL, when compared with traditional chemotherapy, with subgroup analyses showing MRD-positive patients deriving the greatest benefit, he said. Future studies are planned to look more closely at MRD-positive disease and the possible benefits of postponing transplant until the second CR.
At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).
Dr. Lv reported having no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Lv M et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 8.
REPORTING FROM TCT 2019