By John Byrd, MD
2009-01-01
Dr. Byrd indicated no relevant conflicts of interest.
Sorror ML, Storer BE, Sandmaier BM, et al. Five-year
follow-up of patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia
treated with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation after
nonmyeloablative conditioning. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4912-20.
The past decade has brought forward a multitude of new therapies for
chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). A combination of these treatments
as part of chemo-immunotherapy has improved the response rates,
remission durations, and possibly overall survival of patients with
this disease. Despite these advances, no currently available therapy is
a cure for CLL. Also, many patients with CLL eventually become
refractory to traditional treatment modalities, including
chemo-immunotherapy, and, ultimately, die as a direct consequence or
complication of the disease. Identification of strategies that offer
curative intent for CLL would represent a major advance for this
disease.
The recent publication by Sorror and colleagues provides more
conclusive evidence that non-ablative allogeneic stem cell transplant
may represent one such therapy in CLL. Application of ablative
allogeneic transplant in the past has been associated with significant
treatment-related mortality and has only been applicable to the fewer
than 5 percent of patients younger than 50 who develop refractory CLL.
Adaptation of non-ablative approaches has broadened the age group of
CLL patients eligible for this approach, making it more applicable to
the large population of individuals with this disease. Multiple early
reports have been published documenting feasibility and surprisingly
low early treatment-related mortality as compared to previously
published ablative allogeneic stem cell transplant in CLL. More
importantly, graft-versus-leukemia was clearly documented with
meaningful responses observed, even in patients with measurable CLL at
time of transplant. While problems with chronic graft-versus-host
disease (GVHD) clearly arise using the non-ablative allogeneic
approach, significant excitement across the field exists for this
treatment in patients with refractory CLL. The report by Sorror and
Maloney provided what all CLL investigators have been looking for —
extended follow-up showing that a large minority of patients undergoing
this procedure remain disease-free and fully functional at five years.
While the authors identified chronic GVHD as problematic early on, this
eventually burned out in the majority of patients allowing them to be
free of immunosuppressive medication. Given the five-year 50 percent
overall survival and 39 percent progression-free survival with a low
risk of late relapse in this heavily treated CLL population, we must
now consider non-ablative transplant as an option for patients with
relapsed CLL. On a practical level, these findings should decrease the
commonly identified insurance denial or delay in approval by select
insurers that ultimately prevent many individuals from pursuing this
potentially curative therapy. Documentation of long-term follow-up of
this large cohort of CLL patients receiving non-ablative transplants
with very favorable results provides convincing data to support this
modality as a standard, as opposed to a research-based therapy for
select patients with relapsed CLL.
Can we improve further on what has been achieved in non-ablative
transplant for CLL? Several important questions remain to be answered
from the report by Sorror and Maloney and other non-ablative transplant
series in CLL. These include:
1) What proportion of high-risk (i.e., del[17p13.1] or complex
karyotype) patients are salvaged with non-ablative approaches, and
should this treatment be applied earlier in the disease process?
2) Can moderate-intensity regimens or addition of other
immune-modulating agents post-transplant afford the same morbidity
observed by Sorror and colleagues but diminish the risk of relapse in
patients with bulky lymph nodes?
3) Are unrelated donors actually better for transplantation in the CLL population?
To fully pursue these questions and further improve this modality
will require well-controlled clinical trials building upon the
successes already documented with non-ablative transplants in CLL. Many
trials are being initiated to address these questions that hopefully
would afford even better outcomes for patients with this disease.
back to top