Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for acute myeloblastic leukemia in first remission

• Main Authors: S N Bondarenko, E V Semenova, V N Vavilov, N V Stancheva, E V Morozova, A L Alianskiĭ, E V Babenko, N É Osipova, L S Zubarovskaia, B V Afanas'ev
• Format: Article
• Language: Russian
• Published: "Consilium Medicum" Publishing house 2013-07-01
• Series: Терапевтический архив
• Subjects: allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; acute myeloblastic leukemia; first remission
• Online Access: https://ter-arkhiv.ru/0040-3660/article/view/31278
• ISSN: 0040-3660; 2309-5342

AIM: To evaluate the efficiency of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) in patients with acute myeloblastic leukemia in first remission depending on the regimens of conditioning, the source of a graft, and the characteristics of a donor and a recipient/MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 66 treated patients, including from partially HLA-mismatched relatives (n=4), the efficiency of allo-HSCT from related donors (n=26) and unrelated donors (n=40), were compared. According to cytogenetic findings, 7 (11%), 31 (47%), and 10 (15%) patients belonged to low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively/RESULTS: Five-year overall survival (OS) and mortality associated with transplantation were 56 and 22% for allo-HSCT from related donors, 68 and 23% for that from HLA-matched donors, and 71 and 25% for that from partially HLA-mismatched donors, respectively (p=0.8 and p=0.7). The relapse risk after allo-HSCT from unrelated donors was significantly lower than after that from related donors (13 and 35%, respectively; p=0.8). Univariate analysis showed that the OS rates depended on the cytogenetic risk group (OS was 24 and 64% in the high- and intermediate-risk groups, respectively (p=0.027). The relapse risk in chronic graft-versus-host reaction (GVHR) and in grade 3 acute GVHR (p=0.01) was shown to be less than that in grades 1-2 acute GVHR (p=0.06)/CONCLUSION: OS rates after allo-HSCT from related and unrelated donors were comparable and unrelated to the source of a graft, the regimen of conditioning, and other characteristics of a donor and a recipient.