Search

REACH2 and REACH3 were randomized, multicenter, open-label phase 3 studies comparing the selective Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib versus investigators’ choice of best available therapy (BAT) in steroid-refractory (SR) acute (REACH2) or chronic (REACH3) graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD/cGVHD). Moderate-severe aGVHD/cGVHD can progress rapidly; thus, key clinical considerations driving management of patients with SR-aGVHD/SR-cGVHD are prompt treatment initiation and concomitant cytopenias. These post hoc analyses of REACH2/REACH3 describe the impact of timing of treatment initiation after SR-aGVHD/SR-cGVHD diagnosis and development of concomitant cytopenias on treatment outcomes. Ruxolitinib initiation within 3 days from SR-aGVHD diagnosis yielded an extended duration of response and higher Day 28 complete response rates compared with initiation ≥7 days after SR-aGVHD diagnosis (median 178 vs 167 days and 36.6% vs 25.0%, respectively). For patients with SR-cGVHD, Week 24 overall response was not impacted by time to treatment (54.5% vs 42.6% for <14 vs >28 days). Clinically relevant cytopenias were manageable, allowing for maintenance of dose intensity (median 20 mg/d), and did not impact the favorable efficacy outcomes from ruxolitinib treatment. This analysis highlights the practical importance of considering earlier ruxolitinib initiation after SR diagnosis in GVHD and the benefits of ruxolitinib treatment compared with BAT even for patients with cytopenias.

Congenital amegakaryocytic thrombocytopenia is a rare, inherited bone marrow failure syndrome. Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is currently the only curative treatment. In this retrospective study, we analysed 66 patients with allo-HSCT, reported in the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) registry. Bone marrow (BM) was the most widely used stem cell source (n= 40; 61%) followed by peripheral blood (PB) (n= 18; 27%), and unrelated umbilical cord blood (UCB) (n= 8; 12%). Most frequently was a HLA-matched graft from related (n= 26; 39%) and unrelated (n= 15; 23%) donors after a myeloablative busulfan-based conditioning regimen. GvHD prophylaxis was mostly cyclosporine and methotrexate (53%). The 6-year cumulative incidence of graft-failure and second transplant were 25% and 17%, respectively. The 6-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were 66.9% and 85.6%, respectively. The 6-year transplant-related mortality (TRM) was 8.0%. In conclusion, most patients with CAMT benefit from allo-HSCT, but with many graft failures.

Poor-risk (PR) cytogenetic/molecular abnormalities generally direct pediatric patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). We assessed the predictive value of cytogenetic risk classification at diagnosis with respect to post-HSCT outcomes in pediatric patients. Patients younger than 18 years at the time of their first allogeneic HSCT for AML in CR1 between 2005 and 2022 who were reported to the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry were subgrouped into four categories. Of the 845 pediatric patients included in this study, 36% had an 11q23 abnormality, 24% had monosomy 7/del7q or monosomy 5/del5q, 24% had a complex or monosomal karyotype, and 16% had other PR cytogenetic abnormalities. In a multivariable model, 11q23 (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.66, P= 0.03) and other PR cytogenetic abnormalities (HR = 0.55, P= 0.02) were associated with significantly better overall survival when compared with monosomy 7/del7q or monosomy 5/del5q. Patients with other PR cytogenetic abnormalities had a lower risk of disease relapse after HSCT (HR = 0.49, P= 0.01) and, hence, better leukemia-free survival (HR = 0.55, P= 0.01). Therefore, we conclude that PR cytogenetic abnormalities at diagnosis predict overall survival after HSCT for AML in pediatric patients.

Letermovir prophylaxis revolutionized the approach to Cytomegalovirus infection in adult hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT), while data in pediatric setting are still lacking. We retrospectively analyzed 87 HCT children transplanted in 11 AIEOP centers receiving letermovir as off-label indication between January 2020 and November 2022. Letermovir was used as primary, secondary prophylaxis or CMV treatment in 39, 26 and 22 cases, respectively; no discontinuation due to toxicity was reported. Median duration was 100 days (14-256) for primary and 96 days (8-271) for secondary prophylaxis, respectively. None of the patients experienced CMV-clinically significant reactivation during Letermovir primary prophylaxis; one patient developed breakthrough infection during secondary prophylaxis, and 10 and 1 patient experienced asymptomatic CMV-reactivation and CMV-primary infection after drug discontinuation, respectively. Median duration of letermovir in CMV treatment was 40 days (7-134), with 4/22 patients suffering CMV-pneumonia, with an overall response rate of 86.4%. With a median follow-up of 10.7 months (8.2-11.8), estimated 1-year overall survival was 86%; no CMV-related deaths were reported in prophylaxis groups. This is the largest report on Letermovir use in pediatric HCT; real-life data confirm an excellent toxicity profile, with high efficacy as CMV prophylaxis; results in CMV-infection treatment should be investigated in larger, prospective trials.

Optimal conditioning prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for children with non-malignant diseases is subject of ongoing research. This prospective, randomized, phase 2 trial compared safety and efficacy of busulfan with treosulfan based preparative regimens. Children with non-malignant diseases received fludarabine and either intravenous (IV) busulfan (4.8 to 3.2 mg/kg/day) or IV treosulfan (10, 12, or 14 g/m2/day). Thiotepa administration (2 × 5 mg/kg) was at the investigator’s discretion. Primary endpoint was freedom from transplantation (treatment)-related mortality (freedom from TRM), defined as death between Days -7 and +100. Overall, 101 patients (busulfan 50, treosulfan 51) with at least 12 months follow-up were analyzed. Freedom from TRM was 90.0% (95% CI: 78.2%, 96.7%) after busulfan and 100.0% (95% CI: 93.0%, 100.0%) after treosulfan. Secondary outcomes (transplantation-related mortality [12.0% versus 3.9%]) and overall survival (88.0% versus 96.1%) favored treosulfan. Graft failure was more common after treosulfan (n = 11), than after busulfan (n = 2) while all patients were rescued by second procedures except one busulfan patient. CTCAE Grade III adverse events were similar in both groups. This study confirmed treosulfan to be an excellent alternative to busulfan and can be safely used for conditioning treatment in children with non-malignant disease.