Francesco Saraceni

A comparative analysis of biosimilar vs originator filgrastim in combination with plerixafor for stem cell mobilization in lymphoma and multiple myeloma; a propensity-score weighted multicenter approach

genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am J Hum Genet. 2007;81(3):559–575. [4] Loh P-R, Palamara PF, Price AL. Fast and accurate long-range phasing in a UK Biobank cohort. Nat Genet. 2016;48(7):811–816. [5] Patterson N, Price AL, Reich D. Population Structure and Eigenanalysis. PLOS Genet. 2006;2(12):e190 [6] Manichaikul A, Mychaleckyj JC, Rich SS, Daly K, Sale M, Chen W-M. Robust relationship inference in genome-wide association studies. Bioinformatics. 2010;26(22):2867–2873.

Autologous stem cell transplantation is still a valid option in good- and intermediate-risk AML: a GITMO survey on 809 patients autografted in first complete remission

Autologous stem cell transplantation is still a valid option in good- and intermediate-risk AML: a GITMO survey on 809 patients autografted in first complete remission

Thiotepa-busulfan-fludarabine compared to busulfan-fludarabine for sibling and unrelated donor transplant in acute myeloid leukemia in first remission

Background A preparatory regimen consisting of thiotepa-busulfan-fludarabine (TBF) has been associated with reduced relapse in patients with haematological malignancies after haploidentical and cord blood transplants; however, few data exist regarding TBF conditioning in sibling (MSD) and unrelated donor (URD) transplants for AML. Results Among patients receiving a myeloablative (MAC) regimen, TBF-MAC was associated with significantly lower relapse (HR 0.47, p = 0.005) however higher non-relapse mortality (NRM, HR 2.69, p < 10–4) as compared to BF. This led to similar leukemia-free (LFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two regimens (LFS: p = 0.6; OS: p = 0.27). When we selected TBF-MAC patients receiving busulfan 9.6 mg/kg, NRM resulted still higher but no more significantly different as compared to BF-MAC with busulfan 12.8 mg/kg (HR 1.53, p = 0.12); despite the lower busulfan dose, relapse remained inferior with TBF-MAC (HR 0.45, p = 0.01), however no difference in survival could be demonstrated (LFS: p = 0.31; OS: 0.82). Among patients receiving a reduced-intensity (RIC) regimen, similar outcome was observed with TBF-RIC and BF-RIC (LFS: p = 0.77; OS: p = 0.88). Conclusions TBF-MAC as conditioning regimen for transplant from MSD and URD in AML patients in first remission provided stronger anti-leukemic activity but higher NRM as compared to BF-MAC, thus leading to similar survival. TBF-MAC with busulfan 9.6 mg/kg was associated with low relapse and acceptable NRM, however again with no survival benefit. TBF-RIC and BF-RIC resulted in comparable outcome. Methods We conducted a registry-based study comparing outcomes of patients with AML in first remission undergoing transplant from MSD or URD prepared with either TBF (n = 212) or BF (n = 2698) conditioning.

Thiotepa, busulfan and fludarabine compared to busulfan and cyclophosphamide as conditioning regimen for allogeneic stem cell transplant from matched siblings and unrelated donors for acute myeloid leukemia

Busulfan plus cyclophosphamide (BuCy) is the traditional conditioning regimen for allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo‐SCT) for young, fit patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The thiotepa‐busulfan‐fludarabine (TBF) protocol has recently demonstrated promising outcome in cord blood and haploidentical SCT; however, there is limited evidence about this regimen in transplant from matched siblings (MSD) and unrelated donors (UD). We retrospectively compared outcomes of 2523 patients aged 18‐50 with AML in remission, undergoing transplant from MSD or UD prepared with either TBF or BuCy conditioning. A 1:3 pair‐matched analysis was performed: 146 patients receiving TBF were compared with 438 patients receiving BuCy. Relapse risk was significantly lower in the TBF when compared with BuCy group (HR 0.6, P = .02), while NRM did not differ. No significant difference was observed in LFS and OS between the two regimens. TBF was associated with a trend towards higher risk of grades III‐IV aGVHD (HR 1.8, P = .06) and inferior cGVHD (HR 0.7, P = .04) when compared with BuCy. In patients undergoing transplant in first remission, the advantage for TBF in terms of relapse was more evident (HR 0.4, P = .02), leading to a trend for better LFS in favor of TBF (HR 0.7, P = .10), while OS did not differ between the two cohorts. In conclusion, TBF represents a valid myeloablative conditioning regimen providing significantly lower relapse and similar survival when compared with BuCy. Patients in first remission appear to gain the most from this protocol, as in this subgroup a tendency for better LFS was observed when compared with BuCy.

Mobilization policy in multiple myeloma: minimum target or law of redundancy? Two different approaches by the two sides of the Atlantic Ocean

Mobilization policy in multiple myeloma: minimum target or law of redundancy? Two different approaches by the two sides of the Atlantic Ocean

Predicting failure of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization before it starts: the Predicted Poor Mobilizer (pPM) score

Predicting mobilization failure before it starts may enable patient-tailored strategies. Although consensus criteria for predicted PM (pPM) are available, their predictive performance has never been measured on real data. We retrospectively collected and analyzed 1318 mobilization procedures performed for MM and lymphoma patients in the plerixafor era. In our sample, 180/1318 (13.7%) were PM. The score resulting from published pPM criteria had sufficient performance for predicting PM, as measured by AUC (0.67, 95%CI: 0.63–0.72). We developed a new prediction model from multivariate analysis whose score (pPM-score) resulted in better AUC (0.80, 95%CI: 0.76–0.84, p < 0001). pPM-score included as risk factors: increasing age, diagnosis of NHL, positive bone marrow biopsy or cytopenias before mobilization, previous mobilization failure, priming strategy with G-CSF alone, or without upfront plerixafor. A simplified version of pPM-score was categorized using a cut-off to maximize positive likelihood ratio (15.7, 95%CI: 9.9–24.8); specificity was 98% (95%CI: 97–98.7%), sensitivity 31.7% (95%CI: 24.9–39%); positive predictive value in our sample was 71.3% (95%CI: 60–80.8%). Simplified pPM-score can “rule in” patients at very high risk for PM before starting mobilization, allowing changes in clinical management, such as choice of alternative priming strategies, to avoid highly likely mobilization failure.

A Comparison of the Conditioning Regimens BEAM and FEAM for Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Lymphoma: An Observational Study on 1038 Patients From Fondazione Italiana Linfomi

BEAM (carmustine [bis-chloroethylnitrosourea (BCNU)]-etoposide-cytarabine-melphalan) chemotherapy is the standard conditioning regimen for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in lymphomas. Owing to BCNU shortages, many centers switched to fotemustine-substituted BEAM (FEAM), lacking proof of equivalence. We conducted a retrospective cohort study in 18 Italian centers to compare the safety and efficacy of BEAM and FEAM regimens for ASCT in lymphomas performed from 2008 to 2015. We enrolled 1038 patients (BEAM = 607, FEAM = 431), of which 27% had Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), 14% indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and 59% aggressive NHL. Baseline characteristics including age, sex, stage, B-symptoms, extranodal involvement, previous treatments, response before ASCT, and overall conditioning intensity were well balanced between BEAM and FEAM; notable exceptions were median ASCT year (BEAM = 2011 versus FEAM = 2013, P < .001), Sorror score ≥3 (BEAM = 15% versus FEAM = 10%, P = .017), and radiotherapy use (BEAM = 18% versus FEAM = 10%, P < .001). FEAM conditioning resulted in higher rates of gastrointestinal and infectious toxicities, including severe oral mucositis grade ≥3 (BEAM = 31% versus FEAM = 44%, P < .001), and sepsis from Gram-negative bacteria (mean isolates/patient: BEAM = .1 versus FEAM = .19, P < .001). Response status at day 100 post-ASCT (overall response: BEAM = 91% versus FEAM = 88%, P = .42), 2-year overall survival (83.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 81.5% to 86.1%) and progression-free survival (70.3%; 95% CI, 67.4% to 73.1%) were not different in the two groups. Mortality from infection was higher in the FEAM group (subhazard ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.02 to 3.88; P = .04). BEAM and FEAM do not appear different in terms of survival and disease control. However, due to concerns of higher toxicity, fotemustine substitution in BEAM does not seem justified, if not for easier supply.

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation following relapse post autologous stem cell transplantation in adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia: A retrospective analysis of 537 patients from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the EBMT

Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who relapse after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) can be rescued by allogeneic SCT. We identified 537 adult patients with AML allografted in second complete remission (CR2) or first relapse after ASCT in the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) registry. At 3 years post allograft, leukemia free survival (LFS) was 31.4% [95%CI 27.3‐35.6], overall survival (OS) 39.5% [95%CI 35.1‐43.9], relapse incidence (RI) 34.6% [95%CI 30.4‐38.8], and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) 33.7% [95%CI 29.6‐37.9]. RI was higher in patients transplanted in relapse in comparison to those transplanted in CR2 (HR 1.76, P = .004) and in patients who relapsed later after ASCT (HR 0.97 per month, P < 10−3), both translating into better LFS/ OS. Relapse was also lower in patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo‐HSCT) from an unrelated donor (UD) in comparison to those transplanted from a matched sibling donor (MSD) (HR 0.49, P < 10−3). NRM was increased in patients who received total body irradiation (TBI) pre‐ASCT (HR 2.43; P < 10‐4), translating into worse LFS/OS. LFS/OS did not differ between patients allotransplanted with reduced intensity (RIC) or myeloablative (MAC) conditioning. In conclusion, one third of adult patients with AML relapsing post ASCT can be rescued with allo‐HSCT, with better LFS/OS in patients who relapsed later post ASCT, those transplanted in CR2 and those who had not received TBI pre‐ASCT.

Fatal Necrotizing Angiotropic Epstein–barr Virus-negative Large B-cell Lymphoma: A Case Report with Unusual Clinicopathological Features In-between Lymphomatoid Granulomatosis and T-cell/histiocyte-rich Large B-cell Lymphoma

AbstractIn the spectrum of diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL), both T-cell/histiocyte-rich large B-cell lymphoma (TCHRBCL) and most lymphomatoid granulomatosis (LG) cases are characterized by the relative rarity of the neoplastic B-cell population, with respect to the overwhelming non-neoplastic counterpart of T cells or histiocytes. Here we report a case of aggressive B-cell lymphoma with unusual clinicopathological features partially overlapping these two entities.The patient was a previously healthy 55-year-old male, presenting with a computed tomography finding of a pelvic mass, inguinal lymphadenopathies, and pulmonary nodules. Two excisional lymph node biopsies resulted inconclusive for lymphoproliferative disease. Because of a colonic perforation, the patient underwent an urgent laparotomy, which disclosed a large pelvic abscess. The pathological examination of the surgical specimen could not discriminate between a primary aggressive B-cell lymphoproliferative disorder and an abnormal inflammatory hyper-reaction. The patient developed a septic state, not resolving until death, which occurred because of an abdominal hemorrhage. A second perimortem surgical specimen consisting of a nodal mass revealed a diagnosis of an Epstein–Barr virus-negative high-grade large B-cell lymphoma with massive necrosis, angiocentric pattern of growth, and prominent T-cell infiltrate.The unique clinicopathological features did not allow to classify this tumor within any of the recognized WHO entities, potentially representing a new clinicopathological variant of DLBCL in-between TCHRBCL and LG.