Abstract
No reports compare autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT vs allo-SCT) for patients (pts) with relapsed (REL) composite low and intermediate grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (L/I-NHL). Fifty four pts with composite L/I-NHL (30 transformed, 16 composite(same site), 8 discordant(different sites)) who underwent allo (n=40) or auto-SCT (n=14) from Jan ‘89 to June ‘05 were evaluated (Table 1) to compare long-term results.
Twenty pts (37%) (11/40 allo and 9/14 auto) are alive with median follow-up of 32 months (range 10–87). The 2 and 5-y OS for the whole group were 43% [95% confidence interval: 28–56%] and 29% [14–46%] respectively; the 2 and 5-y EFS 40% [26–53%] and 24% [11–39 %]. 5-y OS for the auto and allo-SCT were 51% and 23% respectively (p=.09)(Fig. 1). The 2 and 5-y EFS for the allo vs auto-SCT groups were 36% [24–55%] vs 54% [33–89%] and 27% vs 23% (p=0.4).
Thirty four pts (63%) died; 18 (33%) with REL NHL and 16 (30%) with TRM. TRM was due to GVHD (n=7), infection (n=6), cerebral edema (n=1) and veno-occlusive disease (n=1). All but one (cerebral edema) TRM deaths occurred post allo-SCT. The cumulative incidence (CI) of TRM and REL for the whole group were 37% [17–57%] and 47% [30–64%]. The CI of TRM for allo and auto-SCT were 47% [20–74] and 8% [0–23%] respectively (p=.009)(Fig. 2).
Twenty pts (37%) relapsed post SCT (14/40, 35% allo and 6/14, 43% auto). CI of REL NHL for allo and auto-SCT were 42% [23–61%] and 65% (p=.008)(Fig. 2).
In conclusion EFS for composite L/I-NHL is low post auto-SCT due to a high relapse rate despite acceptable TRM. While relapse risk is significantly lower post allo-SCT, this advantage is offset by a higher TRM in these pts. Future attempts to reduce TRM while preserving the allogeneic graft vs lymphoma effect may be beneficial.
Parameter . | Allo-SCT n=40(%) . | Auto-SCT n=14(%) . |
---|---|---|
* at diagnosis | ||
Age: Range (Median) | 28–57(44) | 25–59(49) |
M:F | 2:1 | 1.3:1 |
Diagnosis | ||
Transformed lymph. | 25(63) | 5(36) |
Discordant lymph. | 7(17) | 1(7) |
Composite lymph. | 8(20) | 8(57) |
Initial Stage | ||
I/II | 4(10) | 6(42) |
III/IV | 36(90) | 8(58) |
B symptoms* | 11(28) | 6(43) |
BM involvement* | 29(73) | 3(21) |
IPI* | ||
0–1 | 18(45) | 11(79) |
2–3 | 21(53) | 3(21) |
4–5 | 1(2) | 0 |
Prior treatment | ||
CHOP | 33(83) | 14(100) |
Purine analogue | 17(43) | 2(14) |
Rituximab | 12(30) | 6(43) |
Parameter . | Allo-SCT n=40(%) . | Auto-SCT n=14(%) . |
---|---|---|
* at diagnosis | ||
Age: Range (Median) | 28–57(44) | 25–59(49) |
M:F | 2:1 | 1.3:1 |
Diagnosis | ||
Transformed lymph. | 25(63) | 5(36) |
Discordant lymph. | 7(17) | 1(7) |
Composite lymph. | 8(20) | 8(57) |
Initial Stage | ||
I/II | 4(10) | 6(42) |
III/IV | 36(90) | 8(58) |
B symptoms* | 11(28) | 6(43) |
BM involvement* | 29(73) | 3(21) |
IPI* | ||
0–1 | 18(45) | 11(79) |
2–3 | 21(53) | 3(21) |
4–5 | 1(2) | 0 |
Prior treatment | ||
CHOP | 33(83) | 14(100) |
Purine analogue | 17(43) | 2(14) |
Rituximab | 12(30) | 6(43) |
Disclosure: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Author notes
Corresponding author
This feature is available to Subscribers Only
Sign In or Create an Account Close Modal