Background:There were few studies on real-world data about autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation(auto-HSCT)or allogeneic HSCT(allo-HSCT)in peripheral T-cell lymphoma(PTCL).This study aimed to investigate ...Background:There were few studies on real-world data about autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation(auto-HSCT)or allogeneic HSCT(allo-HSCT)in peripheral T-cell lymphoma(PTCL).This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients who received auto-HSCT or allo-HSCT in China.Methods:From July 2007 to June 2017,a total of 128 patients who received auto-HSCT(n=72)or allo-HSCT(n=56)at eight medical centers across China were included in this study.We retrospectively collected their demographic and clinical data and compared the clinical outcomes between groups.Results:Patients receiving allo-HSCT were more likely to be diagnosed with stage III or IV disease(95%vs.82%,P=0.027),bone marrow involvement(42%vs.15%,P=0.001),chemotherapy-resistant disease(41%vs.8%,P=0.001),and progression disease(32%vs.4%,P<0.001)at transplantation than those receiving auto-HSCT.With a median follow-up of 30(2–143)months,3-year overall survival(OS)and progression-free survival(PFS)in the auto-HSCT group were 70%(48/63)and 59%(42/63),respectively.Three-year OS and PFS for allo-HSCT recipients were 46%(27/54)and 44%(29/54),respectively.There was no difference in relapse rate(34%[17/63]in auto-HSCT vs.29%[15/54]in allo-HSCT,P=0.840).Three-year non-relapse mortality rate in auto-HSCT recipients was 6%(4/63)compared with 27%(14/54)for allo-HSCT recipients(P=0.004).Subanalyses showed that patients with lower prognostic index scores for PTCL(PIT)who received auto-HSCT in an upfront setting had a better outcome than patients with higher PIT scores(3-year OS:85%vs.40%,P=0.003).Patients with complete remission(CR)undergoing auto-HSCT had better survival(3-year OS:88%vs.48%in allo-HSCT,P=0.008).For patients beyond CR,the outcome of patients who received allo-HSCT was similar to that in the atuo-HSCT group(3-year OS:51%vs.46%,P=0.300).Conclusions:Our study provided real-world data about auto-HSCT and allo-HSCT in China.Auto-HSCT seemed to be associated with better survival for patients in good condition(lower PIT score and/or better disease control).For patients possessing unfavorable characteristics,the survival of patients receiving allo-HSCT group was similar to that in the auto-HSCT group.展开更多
文摘 对急性白血病(AL)患者自体造血干细胞移植(Auto＿HSCT)前进行大剂量化疗,移植后给白细胞介素 2(IL 2)免疫治疗以降低AL患者Auto＿HSCT后的复发率,延长患者的生存期.10例AL第一次缓解期(CR 1)的患者进入研究.移植前急性淋巴细胞白血病(ALL)患者3例均接受大剂量甲氨碟呤1疗程及大剂量阿糖胞苷(HD Ara C)加蒽环类抗肿瘤药1疗程.急性非淋巴细胞白血病(ANLL)患者7例接受HD Ara C加蒽环类抗肿瘤药2疗程.化疗结束后给患者行Auto＿HSCT治疗.预处理方案为:CY/TBI;MAC或EAC方案.移植的CD34+细胞5.5×106～12.2×106/kg.患者造血重建后给IL 21×106～2×106μ治疗每天1次,5d为1疗程.患者均接受3～5疗程的治疗.经以上序惯治疗后,1例ALL患者14月后复发,经化疗无效死亡.9/10(90.00%)例无病生存至今,平均生存期37.10月(37.1±24.98),明显延长.可见对AL患者Auto＿HSCT前大剂量化疗,最大限度降低患者体内白血病负荷;移植后免疫治疗清除微小残留病,可能是降低AL患者Auto＿HSCT后复发,延长患者生存期的有效途径.
文摘Background:There were few studies on real-world data about autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation(auto-HSCT)or allogeneic HSCT(allo-HSCT)in peripheral T-cell lymphoma(PTCL).This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients who received auto-HSCT or allo-HSCT in China.Methods:From July 2007 to June 2017,a total of 128 patients who received auto-HSCT(n=72)or allo-HSCT(n=56)at eight medical centers across China were included in this study.We retrospectively collected their demographic and clinical data and compared the clinical outcomes between groups.Results:Patients receiving allo-HSCT were more likely to be diagnosed with stage III or IV disease(95%vs.82%,P=0.027),bone marrow involvement(42%vs.15%,P=0.001),chemotherapy-resistant disease(41%vs.8%,P=0.001),and progression disease(32%vs.4%,P<0.001)at transplantation than those receiving auto-HSCT.With a median follow-up of 30(2–143)months,3-year overall survival(OS)and progression-free survival(PFS)in the auto-HSCT group were 70%(48/63)and 59%(42/63),respectively.Three-year OS and PFS for allo-HSCT recipients were 46%(27/54)and 44%(29/54),respectively.There was no difference in relapse rate(34%[17/63]in auto-HSCT vs.29%[15/54]in allo-HSCT,P=0.840).Three-year non-relapse mortality rate in auto-HSCT recipients was 6%(4/63)compared with 27%(14/54)for allo-HSCT recipients(P=0.004).Subanalyses showed that patients with lower prognostic index scores for PTCL(PIT)who received auto-HSCT in an upfront setting had a better outcome than patients with higher PIT scores(3-year OS:85%vs.40%,P=0.003).Patients with complete remission(CR)undergoing auto-HSCT had better survival(3-year OS:88%vs.48%in allo-HSCT,P=0.008).For patients beyond CR,the outcome of patients who received allo-HSCT was similar to that in the atuo-HSCT group(3-year OS:51%vs.46%,P=0.300).Conclusions:Our study provided real-world data about auto-HSCT and allo-HSCT in China.Auto-HSCT seemed to be associated with better survival for patients in good condition(lower PIT score and/or better disease control).For patients possessing unfavorable characteristics,the survival of patients receiving allo-HSCT group was similar to that in the auto-HSCT group.
