Bloodline

Home
About
Call for Papers
Free Membership
Search


Educational Features

Image Atlas
Case Studies
Private Lectures
Conference Reviews
Journal Articles
Book Reviews
Glossary


Resources

Conference Calendar
Grants & Fellowships
Hematology Links
BMT Reviews
Classifieds


Specialties

BMT/Stem Cell
Cord Blood
Thrombosis
Hemostasis
Laboratory
Malignancies
Pediatrics
Red Cell Disorders
Infections
Transfusion Medicine
Veterinary


News

Hematology News
BloodLink Newsletter
Blood News Update


Discussion

Today's Discussion
Create New Topic
List by Topic

Members

Join Now
Login

websel.gif:

toprated.gif:

Autologous vs Allogeneic Unrelated Donor Transplantation for ALL

Autologous versus Allogeneic Unrelated Donor Transplantation for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Comparative Toxicity and Outcomes

Daniel Weisdorf, Michael Bishop, Bernie Dharan, Brian Bolwell, Jean Yves Cahn, Mitchell Cairo, Sergio Giralt, John Klein, Hillard Lazarus, Mark Litzow, David Marks, Philip McCarthy, Carole Miller, Gustavo Milone, James Russell, Kirk R. Schultz, Jorge Sierra, Peter Wiernik, Armand Keating, Fausto Loberiza, Craig Kollman, Mary Horowitz

Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 8:213-220 (2002)
© 2002 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

ABSTRACT:

For patients with high-risk or relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) lacking a related histocompatible donor, autologous (Auto) and unrelated donor (URD) transplantation are available options. We compared outcomes and toxicities in 712 patients with ALL (517 URD, 195 Auto) in first complete remission (CR1) or second complete remission (CR2) who underwent transplantation. All patients were <50 years old, although URD patients were younger (median age, 14 versus 18 years, P < .002). The proportion of patients in CR1 versus CR2 was similar (36% versus 38%, P = .57), but more URD recipients than Auto recipients had high-risk karyotypes (25% versus 13%, P = .003) and white blood cell (WBC) counts >= 50  109/L (33% versus 14%, P < .001). Engraftment was similar in URD and Auto recipients. Ex vivo purging delayed but did not prevent engraftment after Auto transplantation. Transplantation- related mortality was higher after URD transplantation (42% ± 8%) than after Auto transplantation (20% ± 12%) in CR1 (P = .004) and also in CR2. Conversely, relapse was more frequent after Auto transplantation in CR1 (Auto, 49% ± 12% versus URD, 14% ± 5%) and CR2 (64% ± 8% versus 25% ± 5%) (P < .0001). These findings showed net similar outcomes for these 2 transplantation choices. Transplantation in CR1 yielded similar 3-year survival rates for URD (51% ± 7%) and Auto (44% ± 12%), as did transplantation in CR2 (40% ± 6% versus 32% ± 9%, respectively). Multivariate regression analysis identified significantly better disease-free survival after the first 6 months in matched URD versus Auto in younger patients, in those in CR2 with CR1 >1 year, WBC <50 x 109/L, performance status >= 90%, and in those who have undergone transplantation since 1995. These comparative data suggest that both matched URD and Auto transplantation can yield extended survival. Although URD transplantation offers substantially better protection against leukemic relapse, improvements in allotransplantation safety and refinements in patient selection are required to better aid treatment decision making for the best overall survival.


pdficon.gif: Download a PDF version of the full article


sm_cjpLogo.gifCopyright 1995-2010 - Carden Jennings Publishing Co., Ltd. All rights reserved. The material available at this site is for educational purposes only and is NOT intended for any diagnostic, clinically related, or other purpose. Carden Jennings Publishing Co., Ltd., assumes no responsibility for any use or misuse of this material and makes no warranty or representation of any kind with respect to the material available at this site.

Related Content