4.6 Article

Autologous bone marrow transplantation in the treatment of refractory systemic sclerosis: early results from a French multicentre phase I-II study

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
卷 119, 期 3, 页码 726-739

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2002.03895.x

关键词

autologous bone marrow transplantation; systemic sclerosis; haematopoietic stem cell transplantation; CD34(+) cell selection; Bayesian method

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has been proposed for refractory autoimmune diseases, including systemic sclerosis (SSc). A sequential Bayesian phase I-II clinical trial was conducted in SSc patients to assess the feasibility, the tolerance and the efficacy of autologous HSCT. Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) were collected using cyclophosphamide (4 g/m(2)) and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (5 mug/kg/d) and reinfused after positive CD34(+) selection. Conditioning used cyclophosphamide (200 mg/kg) or melphalan (140 mg/m(2)) according to cardiac function. The main end-point was the failure of the procedure, defined by failure of either PBSC mobilization, CD34(+) selection or intensification procedure, or by procedure-related death. Among the 12 enrolled patients, three failures occurred: one PBSC mobilization, one CD34(+) selection and one CD34(+) intensification. Probability of graft failure was estimated at 0.286 (95% confidence interval: 0.095-0.54). Autologous PBSC (n = 10) or bone marrow (n = 1) transplantation was actually performed in 11 patients with one procedure-related death. Median time to neutrophil (> 0.5 x 10(9)/l) and platelet (> 25 x 10(9)/l) haematopoietic reconstitution was 12 and 10 d respectively. After 18 months ( range 1-26), eight out of 11 patients have shown major or partial response. Non-myeloablative conditioning, followed by a T cell-depleted autologous PBSC or bone marrow transplantation, appears feasible with low toxicity in severe SSc with short-term clinical benefits.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据