8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Double unrelated umbilical cord blood vs HLA-haploidentical bone marrow transplantation: the BMT CTN 1101 trial

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Results of 2 parallel phase 2 trials of transplantation of unrelated umbilical cord blood (UCB) or bone marrow (BM) from HLA-haploidentical relatives provided equipoise for direct comparison of these donor sources. Between June 2012 and June 2018, 368 patients aged 18 to 70 years with chemotherapy-sensitive lymphoma or acute leukemia in remission were randomly assigned to undergo UCB (n = 186) or haploidentical (n = 182) transplant. Reduced-intensity conditioning comprised total-body irradiation with cyclophosphamide and fludarabine for both donor types. Graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis for UCB transplantation was cyclosporine and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and for haploidentical transplantation, posttransplant cyclophosphamide, tacrolimus, and MMF. The primary end point was 2-year progression-free survival (PFS). Treatment groups had similar age, sex, self-reported ethnic origin, performance status, disease, and disease status at randomization. Two-year PFS was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI], 28% to 42%) compared with 41% (95% CI, 34% to 48%) after UCB and haploidentical transplants, respectively (P = .41). Prespecified analysis of secondary end points recorded higher 2-year nonrelapse mortality after UCB, 18% (95% CI, 13% to 24%), compared with haploidentical transplantation, 11% (95% CI, 6% to 16%), P = .04. This led to lower 2-year overall survival (OS) after UCB compared with haploidentical transplantation, 46% (95% CI, 38-53) and 57% (95% CI 49% to 64%), respectively (P = .04). The trial did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the primary end point, 2-year PFS, between the donor sources. Although both donor sources extend access to reduced-intensity transplantation, analyses of secondary end points, including OS, favor haploidentical BM donors. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01597778.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Contributors
          (View ORCID Profile)
          (View ORCID Profile)
          (View ORCID Profile)
          Journal
          Blood
          American Society of Hematology
          0006-4971
          1528-0020
          January 21 2021
          January 21 2021
          : 137
          : 3
          : 420-428
          Affiliations
          [1 ]Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD;
          [2 ]Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA;
          [3 ]Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Department of Medicine, and
          [4 ]Division of Biostatistics, Institute for Health and Equity, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI;
          [5 ]Department of Hematologic Malignancies, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA;
          [6 ]Emmes Corporation, Rockville, MD;
          [7 ]National Marrow Donor Program, Minneapolis, MN;
          [8 ]Division of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapy, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC;
          [9 ]Department of Hematology/Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (HCT), City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA;
          [10 ]Office of Biostatistics Research, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD;
          [11 ]Michigan Medicine Bone Marrow Transplant and Leukemia, C. S. Mott Children’s Hospital, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI;
          [12 ]Division of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS;
          [13 ]Blood and Marrow Transplant Program, Northside Hospital, Atlanta, GA;
          [14 ]Division of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Department of Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA; and
          [15 ]Division of Hematology, Oncology, and Transplantation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
          Article
          10.1182/blood.2020007535
          7819761
          33475736
          585710e2-2c51-4c08-b269-1d94fa0e5272
          © 2021
          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article