Incorporation of extracorporeal photopheresis into a reduced intensity conditioning regimen in myelodysplastic syndrome and aggressive lymphoma: results from ECOG 1402 and 1902
BackgroundExtracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is an immunomodulatory cellular therapy which has been shown to induce a tolerogenic state in patients with acute and chronic graft‐vs‐host disease. ECOG‐ACRIN explored the activity of ECP as a part of a reduced intensity conditioning regimen in two multicenter trials in patients with MDS (E1902) and lymphomas (E1402). While both studies closed before completing accrual, we report results in 23 patients (17 MDS and 6 lymphoma).Study Design and MethodsPatients received 2 days of ECP followed by pentostatin 4 mg/m2 /day for two consecutive days, followed by 600 cGy of total body irradiation prior to stem cell infusion. Immunosuppression for aGVHD was infusional cyclosporine A or tacrolimus and methotrexate on day +1, +3, with mycophenolate mofetil starting on day 100 for chronic GVHD prophylaxis.ResultsAll patients engrafted, with median time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment of 15‐18 days and 10‐18 days respectively. Grade 3 or 4 aGVHD occurred in 13% and chronic extensive GVHD in 30%.ConclusionsThese studies demonstrate that ECP/pentostatin/TBI is well tolerated and associated with adequate engraftment of neutrophils and platelets in patients with lymphomas and MDS.
Acquired factor VII deficiency following FOLFOX in a patient with colorectal cancer who was also DPD deficient
Treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome patients with erythropoietin with or without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: results of a prospective randomized phase 3 trial by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (E1996)
Abstract This phase 3 prospective randomized trial evaluated the efficacy and long-term safety of erythropoietin (EPO) with or without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor plus supportive care (SC; n = 53) versus SC alone (n = 57) for the treatment of anemic patients with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. The response rates in the EPO versus SC alone arms were 36% versus 9.6%, respectively, at the initial treatment step, 47% in the EPO arm, including subsequent steps. Responding patients had significantly lower serum EPO levels (45% vs 5% responses for levels < 200 mU/mL vs ≥ 200 mU/mL) and improvement in multiple quality-of-life domains. With prolonged follow-up (median, 5.8 years), no differences were found in overall survival of patients in the EPO versus SC arms (median, 3.1 vs 2.6 years) or in the incidence of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (7.5% and 10.5% patients, respectively). Increased survival was demonstrated for erythroid responders versus nonresponders (median, 5.5 vs 2.3 years). Flow cytometric analysis showed that the percentage of P-glycoprotein+ CD34+ marrow blasts was positively correlated with longer overall survival. In comparison with SC alone, patients receiving EPO with or without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor plus SC had improved erythroid responses, similar survival, and incidence of acute myeloid leukemia transformation.