4.7 Article

High-Dose Therapy and Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation in Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia: The Lymphoma Working Party of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 13, Pages 2227-2232

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.24.4905

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose The role of autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) in Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) is not defined. The aim of this study was to analyze the results of ASCT in patients with WM and to determine the prognostic factors that have a significant impact on outcome. Patients and Methods We analyzed 158 adult patients with WM reported to the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) between January 1991 and December 2005. Median time from diagnosis to ASCT was 1.7 years (range, 0.3 to 20.3 years), 32% of the patients experienced treatment failure with at least three lines of therapy, and 93% had sensitive disease at the time of ASCT. Conditioning regimen was total-body irradiation-based in 45 patients. Median follow-up for surviving patients was 4.2 years (range, 0.5 to 14.8 years). Results Nonrelapse mortality was 3.8% at 1 year. Ten patients developed a secondary malignancy, with a cumulative incidence of 8.4% at 5 years. Relapse rate was 52.1% at 5 years. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 39.7% and 68.5%, respectively, at 5 years and were significantly influenced by number of lines of therapy and chemorefractoriness at ASCT. The achievement of a negative immunofixation after ASCT had a positive impact on PFS after ASCT. When used as consolidation at first response, ASCT provided a PFS of 44% at 5 years. Conclusion ASCT is a feasible procedure in young patients with advanced WM. ASCT should not be offered to patients with chemoresistant disease and to those who received more than three lines of therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available