4.7 Article

Nonablative allogeneic stem-cell transplantation for advanced/recurrent mantle-cell lymphoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 21, 期 23, 页码 4407-4412

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.05.501

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Patients with relapsed mantle-cell lymphoma have poor prognosis and short survival. Our aim was to determine the efficacy of nonablative allogeneic stem-cell transplantation in patients with relapsed mantle-cell lymphoma. Patients and Methods: Eighteen patients were treated in one of two consecutive trials. Thirteen patients underwent a conditioning regimen of fludarabine (30 mg/m(2) daily for 3 days), cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m2 daily for 3 days), and high-dose rituximab. For the remaining five patients, the conditioning regimen consisted of cisplatin (25 mg/m2 daily for 4 days), fludarabine (30 mg/m2 daily for 2 days), and cytarabine (1,000 mg/m2 daily for 2 days). Tacrolimus and methotrexate were used for graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis. Results: The median age was 56.5 years. Patients underwent a median of three prior chemotherapy regimens. Prior autologous transplantation failed in five (28%) patients and 16 (89%) had chemosensitive disease. Donor cell engraftment occurred in all patients. Eight patients (44%) required no platelet or RBC transfusion, and acute graft-versus-host disease of greater than grade 2 did not develop in any patient. The day-100 mortality was 0%. Complete remission (CR) occurred in 17 patients. Three patients progressed, and one was reinduced into continuous CR with donor lymphocyte infusion. With a median follow-up period of 26 months, the actuarial probability of current-event-free-survival at 3 years was 82% (95% CI, 65% to 99%). Conclusion: Our data suggest that nonablative allogeneic transplantation is a safe and potentially effective strategy for patients with relapsed and chemosensitive mantle-cell lymphoma. (C) 2003 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

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

4.7
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