ACOR Leukemia Links Home About This Site Contact
 
Search
 Site Contents:

Types of Leukemia
Living with Leukemia
Transplants
Blood & Pathology
Survivor Stories
Medical & Cancer Links
Internet Support Email Lists
Leukemia Links Site Map
In 
Loving Memory of Barbara GrannyBarb Lackritz
A report on the 2007 Tandem BMT Meetings in Keystone, Colorado

By Arthur Flatau (flataua@acm.org)

Table of Contents

Introduction

The combined annual meetings of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT) and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR), -- aka the Tandem BMT meeting -- were held February 8 - February 12, 2007 in Keystone, Colorado.

As in any field that is undergoing a lot of changes the terminology that was used was sometimes inconsistent. I will try to use consistent terminology and acronyms throughout this report. I will use NST to refer to non-myeloablative stem cell transplants and reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) refers to transplants where the preparative regimen was not as intense as the usual regimen, but was still sufficiently intense enough that it would not be given with out a transplant. A true non-myeloablative regimen could be given without a transplant. The preparative regimen in a RIC transplant still has significant anti-cancer effects, but can be tolerated by older and less stable/sicker patients.

I use HSCT to stand for Hematopoetic Stem Cell Transplant as a generic name to refer to some kind of stem cell transplant, where the source of stem cells might be bone marrow, peripheral blood, or cord blood. I will use URD for unrelated donor to mean a transplant with a Matched Unrelated Donor (MUD) or a mismatched Unrelated Donor (which also would be abbreviated MUD, I guess). Of course, GVHD stands for Graft versus Host Disease. Some other acronyms that are used:

TBITotal Body Irradiation
DLIDonor Leukocyte Infusion
TRMTransplant Related Mortality
DFSDisease Free Survival
EFSEvent Free Survival
OSOverall Survival

Unlike previous Tandem meeting, I had a lot of meetings to go to, e.g. the CIBMTR executive and advisory meeting and I did not get to attend as many of the scientific sessions as I usually do.

FRIDAY - FEBRUARY 9

10:30 am, Oral Abstracts -- Allogeneic Transplants

I have included links to the original abstracts below.

Long-term outcome of methotrexate-free GVHD prophylaxis using sirolimus and tacrolimus in matched related (MRD) and unrelated donor (URD) peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) (Abstract 7)

Corey Culter

Sirolimus was initially developed as an anti-fungal, but not particularily effective. It is part of the standard of care for immunosuppression in kidney and liver transplants. Condition of Cytoxan and TBI (14 Gy!). No G-CSF before day 12 (because of anticipated early engraftment because of not using MTX). 53 patients with Matched Related donors and 30 URD. Most patients had AML and CML and few others. Engraftment to 500 ANC was at day 14. Platelet count to 100K was about 17 days. Discharge was at 19 days (median). 80 of 81 patients survived until initial discharge. No cases of steriod resistant acute GVHD. Toxicity was lower then many other series. 2 deaths related to GVHD, 13 deaths due to relapse. 66% relapse free survival at 2 years.

Conclusions: Sirolimus and Tacrolimus without MTX results in early engraftment and low transplant related toxicity with excellent GVHD control. The related and unrelated donor had similar survival. The control of Acute GVHD was good, however the incidence of chronic GVHD was still higher then desired (50%).

There is a randomized trial (BMT CTN 0402) comparing sirolimus (rapamycin) and Tacrolimus versus Tacrolimus and MTX.

High Recipient CD4+CD25hi Regulatory T-Cell Level Pre-Transplant Is Associated with Reduced Overall Survival after Unrelated Donor Hematopoyetic Stem Cell Transplantation (Abstract 8)

Rafael Durate

CD4+CD25hi T-cells (T-regs) may effect the outcome of HSCT in humans. 86 patients with an matched unrelated donor had a T-cell depleted transplant (71 patients were T cell depleted). The level of T-regs did not have any effect on acute GVHD or transplant related mortality, however the incidence of chronic GVHD was higher as was the rate of relapse.

Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in HIV-Positive Patients with Malignant and Non-Malignant Disorders: A Report from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) (Abstract 9)

Vikas Gupta

Previous reports suggest auto transplants are useful in HIV+ patients with lymphoma. The objective was to evaluate the outcomes of HIV+ patients undergoing allo-HSCT. All confirmed HIV+ patients who underwent AlloHSCT in the CIBMTR database, from 1987-2003 (8 after 1996, the rest before), 30 patients, 22 with maliginant disease, 8 with non-malignant disease. Median age was 34. 5 of the non-malignant patients were transplanted for primary HIV disease. Median days to engraftment was 15 days. 45% mortality at 100%. Survival of 20% at 2 years. Of 8 patients transplanted after 1996, 4 survive, compared to 2 of 22 transplanted before 1996, probably due to better supportive care and better HIV treatments. 3 patients died of relapse, the rest primiarily from infection and organ toxicity.

A New Stratification Strategy That Identifies a High Risk Subset of Class III Patients among Children with Thalassemia Major Undergoing a Matched Related Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation (Abstract 10)

Vikram Matthews

There are 10000 children diagnosed with Beta-Thalassemia major, annually. HSCT is only known cure. 190 patients under HLA matched related transplants at their center. Patients can be stratified based on risk factors into Lucarelli Class I, II and III patients. Class I and II patients had much better survivial then Class III patients. Unfortunatley some what more then 50% patients are Class III. When Class III patients were stratified according to age over 7 and liver size (bigger then 5cm), those patients had a very poor outcome. Patients who were in Class III who were 7 and younger and a liver size less then 5cm had an outcome almost as good as Class II patients.

Impact of Pre-Transplant Splenectomy on Patients with ß Thalassemia Major Undergoing a Matched Related Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation (Abstract 11)

Vikram Matthews

(Same cohort of patients as above). Pre-transplant Splectomy in Class III patients, 27 patients had splectomy, 73 did not havea splectomy. ANC engratment was faster in the patients splectomy (15.4 days) versus non (17.5 median days). Significantly fewers packed red cells transfusion were done in spectomy group and somewhat fewer platelet transfusions. However the overall survival of the splectomy group was signficantly worse as was the EFS. This might be because the patients who had a splectomy had other risk factors. In conclusion, no significant benefit from splectomy and should be used only based on transfusion guidelines and not routinely used prior to transplant.

Early Hematopoietic Chimerism Predicts Engraftment after Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cell Transplantation (Abstract 12)

Frederico Moscardo

Cord blood units have a low number of stem cells and result in long time to engraftment and high rate of graft failure. Hypothesis that an early mixed chimerism after UCB transplant predicts poor engraftment. 49 patients who underwent UCB transplant and had a bone marrow sample early (14-19 days post transplant). 90% of patients had successful engraftment (median of 19 days). 95% engrafted by day 60. All 4 patients that had less then 60% donor chimerism at early bone marrow failed to engraft.

12:15 Donor Health and Safety Working Committee

Presented data on the 41000+ donors listed in the CIBMTR database, their ages ranged from <1 to 96!. Discussed a paper, The Burden of the Volunteer Unrelated Hematopoietic Cell Donor: Results of a Prospective NMDP Trial Assessing Toxicities Associated with PBSC Collections, 1999-2005, that looked at side effect experience by donors who donate peripheral stem cells. Most (80%) appeared to have few adverse effect, although most experience some bone pain. About 10% experience severe bone pain.

A similar study of marrow donors, showed that about 3% experience severe side effects, with about 1.35% have severe side effects as determined by a panel of 5 doctors.

The data on safety is limited. What is available is largely in younger adult donors. There is little safety data in donors over 60 and almost none in pediatric donors (who only donate for relatives).

RDSafe is a study to look at complications in related donors. The plan is to get data on about 2700 donors at 30 large volume donor centers. Trying to find rare side effects possibly related to the use of G-CSF. Also will use 6400 donors from NMDP. The donor centers will fill out a couple of initial forms and the follow up will by phone from the CIBMTR.

Paul O'Donnell present a proposal to do a survey of CIBMTR centers, to see if related donors are cared for by different doctors then the patient -- is this seen as a conflict of interest. (NMDP has a policy that requires the donor to be cared for by a different doctor then the patient).

4:30 pm Designing Clinical Trials in HCT: Case Studies

Mary Horowitz, Shelly Carter, DSc; Brent Logan, PhD; Gerard Socie, MD, PhD; Marcie R. Tomblyn, MD, MS<

Marcie Tomblyn gave an overview of clinical trials: A Clincal Trial is a prospective evaluation of a treatment or intervention. Conduncted in an organized fashion to answer a particular question. For HSCT, define utility for a disease, define appropriate stem cell source (URD, UCB, etc.), conditioning regimens (NSCT, fully ablative), prophylaixs, supportive care, relapse.

Determine the hypothesis, primary and secondary endpoints, study schema, inclusion and exclusion criteria -- define accural issues, statistical approach, informed consent.

Elements of a research question, is it feasible, interesting, ethical. Are there enough patients?

Endpoints, event that occurs and is used to answer study question. -- Used to determine sample size (big enough to have statisical significant).

HSCT endpoints, OS, DFS, PFS, disese control, TRM, engraftment, toxicities, infections, GVHD.

Study Structure, Phase I-III. Control Group, -- Historical, concurrent comparative group

Phase I -- Toxicity screening and deterimination of maximum tolerated doses. PHase IA - healthy subjects, IB - disesased subjects. Small Studies - < 10 per dose

Phase II -- Deterimination if treatment has any biological activity. Single well describe treatment regimen. Small sample size, <40 - 50 Used to select treatment for Phase II trils

Phase III -- Usually Randomized Clinical Trial. Goal: Comparision of two or more treatment regimens. Large sample sizes, possibly heterogeneous population.

Phase IV -- long term survellience.

Statistical Design -- What number of patients do you need to answer the question. Stopping guidelines -- stop if treatment is not safe.

SATURDAY - FEBRUARY 10

CIBMTR Stem Cell Outcomes Database Data Advisory Meeting

This session was an overview and discussion on the new Stem Cell Outcomes Database. The new legislationg (C.W. Bill Young Cell Transplantation Program) requires all transplants in the U.S. to be reported to the CIBMTR. The discussion include what information would be collected on cord blood units, how patients would be uniquely identified (even if they changed centers, e.g. after an auto and then used another center for an allo transplant, or began a search and one center but then were transplanted at another), want kind of data would be collected, in particular what kind of quality of life data would be collected.

7:30 pm ASBMT President's Dinner

Usually there is not much of interest happening at the ASBMT dinner. However Dr Yoshihisa Kodera of the Japanese Red Cross Nagoya First Hospital sat next to me and we had some fascinating conversation. The story of his that I liked the best (I hope I have this accurately, it was a bit difficult to understand him, mostly because he did not talk loudly and the room was fairly loud). He had a patient with leukemia. She had a transplant when she was in her 50s. Now she is over 80! and in good health. That is the kind of story I like to hear.

Sunday - FEBRUARY 11

Consumer Advocacy Committee (CAC) meeting

We had an interesting discussion on how to disseminate the recently released guidelines for patients on long term screening that survivors (of both autologous and allogeneic) transplants should undergo. Some folks, including me felt that it had take a very long time (a year or so) to finish these, however others who are more familiar with similar projects thought it was done rather quickly. We also discussed several relatively recent publications from the CIBMTR (listed below) that we could try to translate into lay language. Three of the papers are not yet published, although the paper by Bishop et.al. should be published shortly. The papers we considered (and have been published or accepted for publication are):

Bishop MM, Beaumont JL, Hahn EA, Cella D, Andrykowski MA, Brady MJ, Horowitz MM, Sobocinski KA, Rizzo JD, Wingard JR. The late effects of cancer and hematopoietic cell transplantation on spouses/partners compared to HCT survivors and survivor-matched controls. J Clin Oncol

Laughlin MJ, Eapen M, Rubinstein P, Wagner JE, Zhang MJ, Champlin RE, Stevens C, Barker JN, Gale RP, Lazarus HM, Marks DI, van Rood JJ, A Scaradavou, Horowitz MM. Outcomes after transplantation of cord blood or bone marrow from unrelated donors in adults with leukemia. N Engl J Med 351:2265-2275, 2004



Arthur Flatau
flataua@acm.org Austin, Texas




GrannyBarb and Art's Leukemia Links Site Map


HOME  ::  ABOUT THIS SITE  ::  CONTACT

Last modified: Tue Mar 20 20:57:28 CST 2007

Copyright ©2007 ACOR, Inc. All worldwide rights reserved.
ACOR and ACOR.org are registered trademarks of
the Association of Cancer Online Resources, Inc.