Comparison of efficacies of haploidentical transplantation and matched sibling donor transplantation in treating T‐cell lymphoblastic lymphoma

Bibliographic Details
Title: Comparison of efficacies of haploidentical transplantation and matched sibling donor transplantation in treating T‐cell lymphoblastic lymphoma
Authors: Ruowen Wei, Jun Fang, Wei Shi, Xuan Lu, Yingying Wu, Shan Jiang, Ao Zhang, Shanshan Liao, Chunxia Qin, Guohui Cui, Linghui Xia
Source: Cancer Medicine, Vol 12, Iss 9, Pp 10499-10511 (2023)
Publisher Information: Wiley, 2023.
Publication Year: 2023
Collection: LCC:Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens
Subject Terms: allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, haploidentical, matched sibling donor, PET/CT, T‐cell lymphoblastic lymphoma, Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens, RC254-282
More Details: Abstract Objective To investigate the differences in efficacy and safety between haploidentical donor hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HID‐HSCT) and matched sibling donor HSCT (MSD‐HSCT) in patients with T‐cell lymphoblastic lymphoma (T‐LBL). Methods In this retrospective analysis, we enrolled 38 patients who had undergone allogeneic HSCT at our institution between 2013 and 2021. The study participants included 28 patients who underwent HID‐HSCT and 10 patients who underwent MSD‐HSCT. We compared the patient characteristics and treatment effectiveness and safety between the two groups and evaluated potential prognostic variables for patients with T‐LBL. Results The median follow‐up durations in the HID‐HSCT and MSD‐HSCT groups were 23.5 (range: 4–111) and 28.5 (range: 13–56) months, respectively. All patients showed full‐donor chimerism after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Except for two patients in the HID‐HSCT cohort who developed poor graft function, all patients showed neutrophil and platelet engraftments after HSCT. The cumulative incidences of grades III–IV acute graft‐versus‐host disease were 37.5% and 28.57% in the HID‐HSCT and MSD‐HSCT groups, respectively (p = 0.84). The cumulative incidences of limited (34.13% vs. 28.57%, p = 0.82) and extensive (31.22% vs. 37.50%, p = 0.53) chronic graft‐versus‐host disease did not differ between the two cohorts. In the HID‐HSCT and MSD‐HSCT cohorts, the estimated 2‐year overall survival rates were 70.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 54.9%–90.0%) and 56.2% (95% CI: 31.6%–100%), respectively (p = 1.00), and the estimated 2‐year progression‐free survival (PFS) rates were 48.5% (95% CI: 32.8%–71.6%) and 48.0% (95% CI: 24.6%–93.8%), respectively (p = 0.94). Furthermore, the Cox proportional‐hazards model showed that a positive positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) status before HSCT in patients who had completed chemotherapy was an independent risk factor for PFS in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.0367). Conclusion This study showed that HID‐HSCT had comparable effectiveness and safety to MSD‐HSCT in treating T‐LBL. HID‐HSCT could serve as an alternate treatment option for T‐LBL in patients without an eligible identical donor. Achievement of the PET/CT‐negative status before HSCT may contribute to better survival.
Document Type: article
File Description: electronic resource
Language: English
ISSN: 2045-7634
Relation: https://doaj.org/toc/2045-7634
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5786
Access URL: https://doaj.org/article/a9753f0a909742c3ae6e68e3c8accee2
Accession Number: edsdoj.9753f0a909742c3ae6e68e3c8accee2
Database: Directory of Open Access Journals
More Details
ISSN:20457634
DOI:10.1002/cam4.5786
Published in:Cancer Medicine
Language:English