cyclophosphamide

Hematopoietic Stem Cell Collection in Multiple Myeloma Patients: Influence of the Lenalidomide-Based Therapy and Mobilization Regimen Prior to Auto-HSCT

BONE MARROW TRANSPLANTATION , , , , , ,

II Kostroma, AA Zhernyakova, ZhV Chubukina, IM Zapreeva, SA Tiranova, AV Sel’tser, NYu Semenova, SS Bessmel’tsev, AV Chechetkin, SV Gritsaev

Russian Research Institute of Hematology and Transfusiology, 16 2-ya Sovetskaya str., Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, 191024

For correspondence: Ivan Ivanovich Kostroma, MD, PhD, 16 2-ya Sovetskaya str., Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, 191024; Теl.: +7(921)784-82-82; e-mail: obex@rambler.ru

For citation: Kostroma II, Zhernyakova AA, Chubukina ZhV, et al. Hematopoietic Stem Cell Collection in Multiple Myeloma Patients: Influence of the Lenalidomide-Based Therapy and Mobilization Regimen Prior to Auto-HSCT. Clinical oncohematology. 2018;11(2):192–7.

DOI: 10.21320/2500-2139-2018-11-2-192-197

ABSTRACT

Background. A prompt graft acceptance is essential for positive autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) outcome in multiple myeloma patients (MM). Prompt and favourable hematopoietic regeneration is associated with CD34+ cell count in a transplant. Although the indicators of low autotransplant cellularity have been defined, the practical application of new drug products and HSC mobilization regimens strengthens the relevance of determining their influence on the transplant quality.

Aim. To determine the factors that are associated with low efficacy of auto-HSCT in MM patients and to evaluate the impact of lenalidomide during induction period and of vinorelbine as a mobilization regimen on the prognosis.

Materials & Methods. The authors performed a retrospective analysis of autotransplant collection results in 68 MM patients treated with two mobilization regimens: 3 g/m2 cyclophosphamide with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and 30 mg/m2 vinorelbine with G-CSF. Mobilization was aimed at collecting not less than 2–4 × 106 CD34+ cells per kg body mass. CD34+ cell count was determined by four-color analysis on the Cytomics FC 500 laser flow cytometer.

Results. The analysis showed that age or MM immunochemical specificity were not associated with CD34+ cell count in the transplant. Prior lenalidomide treatment compared to therapy without immunomodulators (4.1 × 106/kg vs. 7.76 × 106/kg) tends to decrease CD34+ count (р = 0.066). Cyclophosphamide included into mobilization regimen compared to vinorelbine (3.96 × 106/kg vs. 6.8 × 106/kg) significantly increased CD34+ cell count (р = 0.022).

Conclusion. The decrease of CD34+ cell count in the autotransplant of the MM patients treated with lenalidomide prior to auto-HSC collection, and a lower mobilization activity of vinorelbine provide a basis for a differentiated selection of mobilization regimens. Vinorelbine may be administered to patients with a single auto-HSCT, i.e. elderly people and patients with complete response. In case of substantial lenalidomide treatment prior to auto-HSCT, intermediate-dose cyclophosphamide is preferred.

Keywords: auto-HSCT, multiple myeloma, mobilization regimen, cyclophosphamide, vinorelbine, lenalidomide, predictors.

Received: November 29, 2017

Accepted: February 9, 2018

Read in PDF 

REFERENCES

  1. Бессмельцев С.С., Абдулкадыров К.М. Множественная миелома: руководство для врачей. М.: МК, 2016. 504 с.[Bessmel’tsev SS, Abdulkadyrov KM. Mnozhestvennaya mieloma: rukovodstvo dlya vrachei. (Multiple myeloma: manual for physicians.) Moscow: MK Publ.; 2016. 504 p. (In Russ)]
  2. Менделеева Л.П., Вотякова О.М., Покровская О.С. и др. Национальные клинические рекомендации по диагностике и лечению множественной миеломы. Гематология и трансфузиология. 2016;61(1, прил. 2):1–24. doi: 10.18821/0234-5730-2016-61-1(Прил.2).[Mendeleeva OP, Votyakova OM, Pokrovskaya OS, et al. National clinical recommendations in diagnosis and treatment of multiple myeloma. Gematologiya i transfuziologiya. 2016;61(1, Suppl. 2):1–24. doi: 10.18821/0234-5730-2016-61-1(Прил.2). (In Russ)]
  3. Bender JG, To LB, Williams S, Schwartzberg LS. Defining a therapeutic dose of peripheral blood stem cells. J Hematother. 1992;1(4):329–41. doi: 10.1089/scd.1.1992.1.329.
  4. Olivieri A, Offidani M, Montanari M, et al. Factors affecting hemopoietic recovery after high-dose therapy and autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation: a single center experience. 1998;83(4):329–37.
  5. Nakasone H, Kanda Y, Ueda T, et al. Retrospective comparison of mobilization methods for autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. Am J Hematol. 2009;84(12):809–14. doi: 1002/ajh.21552.
  6. Stiff PJ, Micalef I, Nademanee AP, et al. Transplanted CD34+ cell dose associated with long-term platelet count recovery following autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplant in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or multiple myeloma. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2011;17(8):1146–53. doi: 1016/j.bbmt.2010.11.021.
  7. Hamadani M, Kochuparambil T, Osman S, et al. Intermediate-dose versus low-dose cyclophosphamide and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma treated with novel induction therapies. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2012;18(7):1128–35. doi: 1016/j.bbmt.2012.01.005.
  8. Грицаев С.В., Кузяева А.А., Волошин С.В. и др. Заготовка трансплантата для аутологичной трансплантации гемопоэтических стволовых клеток онкогематологическим больным: частота и причины неудачных сборов. Русский медицинский журнал. 2013;1:30–[Gritsaev SV, Kuzyaeva AA, Voloshin SV, et al. Transplant collection for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with oncohematological diseases: frequency and reasons for poor mobilization. Russkii meditsinskii zhurnal. 2013;1:30–5. (In Russ)]
  9. Stockerl-Goldstein KE, Reddy SA, Horning SF, et al. Favorable treatment outcome in nonHodgkin’s lymphoma patients with ‘poor’ mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2000;6(5):506–12. doi: 1016/s1083-8791(00)70021-8.
  10. Watts MJ, Ings SJ, Flynn M, et al. Remobilization of patients who fail to achieve minimal progenitor thresholds at the first attempt is clinically worthwhile. Br J Haematol. 2000;111(1):287–91. doi: 1111/j.1365-2141.2000.02346.x.
  11. Sugrue MW, Williams K, Pollock BH, et al. Characterization and outcome of ‘hard to mobilize’ lymphoma patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation. Leuk Lymphoma. 2000;39(5–6):509–19. doi: 3109/10428190009113381.
  12. Грицаев С.В., Кузяева А.А., Бессмельцев С.С. Отдельные аспекты аутологичной трансплантации гемопоэтических стволовых клеток при множественной миеломе. Клиническая онкогематология. 2017;10(1):7–12. doi: 21320/2500-2139-2017-10-1-7-12.[Gritsaev SV, Kuzyaeva AA, Bessmel’tsev SS. Certain Aspects of Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Multiple Myeloma. Clinical oncohematology. 2017;10(1):7–12. doi: 10.21320/2500-2139-2017-10-1-7-12. (In Russ)]
  13. Down JD, Boudewijn A, Dillingh JH, et al. Relationships between ablation of distinct haematopoietic cell subsets and the development of donor bone marrow engraftment following recipient pretreatment with different alkylating drugs. Br J 1994;70(4):611–6. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1994.359.
  14. Lokhorst HM, Sonneveld P, Wijermans PW, et al. Intermediate-dose melphalan (IDM) combined with G-CSF (filgrastim) is an effective and safe induction therapy for autologous stem cells in multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 1996;92(1):44–8. doi: 1046/j.1365-2141.1996.00306.x.
  15. Kumar S, Dispenzieri A, Lacy MQ, et al. Impact of lenalidomide therapy on stem cell mobilization and engraftment post-peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Leukemia. 2007;21(9):2035– doi: 10.1038/sj.leu.2404801.
  16. Mazumder A, Kaufman J, Niesvizky R, et al. Effect of lenalidomide therapy on mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells in previously untreated multiple myeloma patients. Leukemia. 2008;22(6):1280–1. doi: 1038/sj.leu.2405035.
  17. Mark T, Stern J, Furst JR, et al. Stem cell mobilization with cyclophosphamide overcomes the suppressive effect of lenalidomide therapy on stem cell collection in multiple myeloma. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008;14(7):795–8. doi: 1016/j.bbmt.2008.04.008.
  18. Popat U, Saliba R, Thandi R, et al. Impairment of filgrastim-induced stem cell mobilization after prior lenalidomide in patients with multiple myeloma. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009;15(6):718–23. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2009.02.011.
  19. Nazha A, Cook R, Vogl DT, et al. Stem cell collection in patients with multiple myeloma: impact of induction therapy and mobilization regimen. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2011;46(1):59– doi: 10.1038/bmt.2010.63.
  20. Cavallo F, Bringhen S, Milone G, et al. Stem cell mobilization in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma after lenalidomide induction therapy. Leukemia. 2011;25(10):1627–31. doi: 10.1038/leu.2011.131.
  21. Bhutani D, Zonder J, Valent J, et al. Evaluating the effects of lenalidomide induction therapy on peripheral stem cells collection in patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant for multiple myeloma. Supp Care Cancer. 2013;21(9):2437–42. doi: 10.1007/s00520-013-1808-5.
  22. Elliot C, Samson DM, Armitage S, et al. When harvest peripheral blood stem cells after mobilization therapy: prediction of CD34-positive cell yield by preceding day CD34-positive concentration in peripheral blood. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(3):970–3. doi: 1200/JCO.1996.14.3.970.
  23. Remes K, Matinlauri I, Grenman S, et al. Daily measurements of blood CD34+ cells after stem cell mobilization predict stem cell yield and post-transplant hematopoietic recovery. J Hematother. 1997;6(1):13–9. doi: 10.1089/scd.1.1997.6.13.
  24. Knudsen LM, Gaarsdal E, Jensen L, et al. Evaluation of mobilized CD34+ cell counts to guide timing and yield of large-scale collection by leukapheresis. J Hematother. 1998;7(1):45–52. doi: 10.1089/scd.1.1998.7.45.
  25. Corso A, Caberlon S, Pagnucco G, et al. Blood stem cell collections in multiple myeloma: definition of a scoring system. Bone Marrow Transplantat. 2000;26(3):283–6. doi: 1038/sj.bmt.1702514.
  26. Perea G, Sureda A, Martino R, et al. Predictive factors for a successful mobilization of peripheral blood CD34+ cells in multiple myeloma. Ann Hematol. 2001;80(10):592–7. doi: 1007/s002770100351.
  27. Gojo I, Guo C, Sarkodee-Adoo C, et al. High dose cyclophosphamide with or without etoposide for mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells in patients with multiple myeloma: efficacy and toxicity. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2004;34(1):69–76. doi: 1038/sj.bmt.1704529.
  28. Гальцева И.В., Давыдова Ю.О., Гапонова Т.В. и др. Абсолютное количество гемопоэтических стволовых клеток CD34+ в периферической крови перед процедурой лейкоцитафереза как параметр, прогнозирующий эффективность сбора стволовых клеток. Терапевтический архив. 2017;89(7):18–24. doi: 17116/terarkh201789718-24.[Gal’tseva IV, Davydova YuO, Gaponova TV, et al. Absolute numbers of peripheral blood CD34+ hematopoietic stem cells prior to a leukapheresis procedure as a parameter predicting the efficiency of stem cell collection. Terapevticheskii arkhiv. 2017;89(7):18–24. doi: 10.17116/terarkh201789718-24. (In Russ)]
  29. Fu P, Bagai RK, Meyerson H, et al. Pre-mobilization therapy blood CD34+ cell count predicts the likelihood of successful hematopoietic stem cell mobilization. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2006;38(3):189–96. doi: 1038/sj.bmt.1705431.
  30. Pusic I, Jiang SY, Landua S, et al. Impact of mobilization and remobilization strategies on achieving sufficient stem cell yields for autologous transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008;14(9):1045–56. doi: 1016/j.bbmt.2008.07.004.
  31. Ozsan GH, Micallef IN, Dispenzieri A, et al. Hematopoietic recovery kinetics predicts for poor CD34+ cell mobilization after cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in multiple myeloma. Am J Hematol. 2012;87(1):1–4. doi: 10.1002/ajh.22179.
  32. Duarte RF, Shaw BE, Marin P, et al. Plerixafor plus granulocyte CSF can mobilize hematopoietic stem cells from multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients failing previous mobilization attempts: EU compassionate use data. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2011;46(1):52–8. doi: 10.1038/bmt.2010.54.
  33. Fruehauf S, Ehninger G, Hubel K, et al. Mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells for autologous transplant in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and multiple myeloma patients by plerixafor and G-CSF and detection of tumor cell mobilization by PCR in multiple myeloma patients. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2010;45(2):269–75. doi: 1038/bmt.2009.142.

Prevention of Acute Graft-Versus-Host Reaction after Allogeneic Unrelated Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: Comparison of Effectiveness of Treatment Regimens Based on Anti-Thymocyte Globulin and Cyclophosphamide

BONE MARROW TRANSPLANTATION , , , ,

OV Pirogova, IS Moiseev, EV Babenko, OA Slesarchuk, OV Paina, SN Bondarenko, EV Morozova, AL Alyanskii, BV Afanas’ev

RM Gorbacheva Scientific Research Institute of Pediatric Hematology and Transplantation; Academician IP Pavlov First St. Petersburg State Medical University, 6/8 L’va Tolstogo str., Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, 197022

For correspondence: Ol’ga Vladislavovna Pirogova, 6/8 L’va Tolstogo str., Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, 197022; Tel: +7(812)338-62-65; e-mail: dr.pirogova@gmail.com

For citation: Pirogova OV, Moiseev IS, Babenko EV, et al. Prevention of Acute Graft-Versus-Host Reaction after Allogeneic Unrelated Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: Comparison of Effectiveness of Treatment Regimens Based on Anti-Thymocyte Globulin and Cyclophosphamide. Clinical oncohematology. 2016;9(4):391–97 (In Russ).

DOI: 10.21320/2500-2139-2016-9-4-391-397

ABSTRACT

Background & Aims. So far there is no data presented on the effectiveness of prevention of the graft-versus-host reaction (GVH) using post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) prescribed after unrelated donor allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). The aim of this study is to evaluate the incidence of acute and chronic GVH, the transplantation-associated mortality rate, the event-free and overall survival rates, as well as the toxicity profile and the incidence of infectious complications in the study group using cyclophosphamide for GVH prevention; the other aim is to carry out a comparative analysis of the obtained results with the historical control group.

Methods. 110 adult patients were enrolled in a clinical study to evaluate the effectiveness of GVH prevention, using PTCy (No. NCT02294552). In order to prevent GVH, the study group (PTCy group) received cyclophosphamide, tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF). The historical control group (ATG group) consisted of 160 patients prescribed with a GVH prevention regimen including anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG), calcineurin inhibitors, and methotrexate or MMF. Peripheral blood stem cells were used as a source of the transplant.

Results. The cumulative incidence of II–IV degree acute GVH (18.2 % vs. 40.4 %, respectively; p < 0.0001), III–IV degree GVH (4.5 % vs. 22.5 %, respectively; p < 0.0001), and chronic GVH (21.7 % vs. 40.6 %, respectively; p < 0.0001) was significantly lower in the PTCy group than in the ATG group. Prevention of GVH based on PTCy was associated with the reduction in transplant-associated mortality (12.7 % vs. 33.7 %, respectively; p = 0.003), increased overall survival (70.9 % vs. 44.4 %, respectively; p < 0.001), event-free survival (68.2 % vs. 38.1 %, respectively; p < 0.001) and GVH- and relapse-free survival rates (59.1 % vs. 16.3 %, respectively; p = 0.001). Prevention of GVH using PTCy (as compared to ATG) was less toxic, accompanied by a reduction in the incidence veno-occlusive disease (2.7 % vs. 10.9 %, respectively; p = 0.016), severe mucositis (69.5 % vs. 87.6 %, respectively; p < 0.001), and invasive mycosis (7.2 % vs. 29 %, respectively; p < 0.001).

Conclusion. A combination of cyclophosphamide with tacrolimus and MMF is an effective regimen for GVH prevention in patients after allo-HSCT from an unrelated donor.

Keywords: graft-versus-host reaction, GVH prevention, allo-HCST, cyclophosphamide, anti-thymocyte globulin.

Received: March 30, 2016

Accepted: May 4, 2016

Read in PDF (RUS) pdficon

REFERENCES

  1. Thomas’ Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation. 3rd edition. Malden, MA: Blackwell Science Publishers; 2004. pp. 130–77. doi: 10.1002/9780470987070.
  2. Szydlo R, Goldman JM, Klein JP, et al. Results of allogeneic bone marrow transplants for leukemia using donors other than HLA-identical siblings. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15(5):1767–77.
  3. Di Stasi A, Milton DR, Poon LM, et al. Similar transplantation outcomes for acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome patients with haploidentical versus 10/10 human leukocyte antigen-matched unrelated and related donors. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014;20(12):1975–81. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2014.08.013.
  4. Zuckerman T, Rowe JM. Alternative donor transplantation in acute myeloid leukemia: which source and when? Curr Opin Hematol. 2007;14(2):152–61. doi: 1097/moh.0b013e328017f64d.
  5. Tolar J, Sodani P, Symons H, et al. Alternative donor transplant of benign primary hematologic disorders. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2015;50(5):619–27. doi: 10.1038/bmt.2015.1.
  6. Anasetti C, Beatty PG, Storb R, et al. Effect of HLA incompatibility on graft-versus-host disease, relapse, and survival after marrow transplantation for patients with leukemia or lymphoma. Hum Immunol. 1990;29(2):79–91. doi: 10.1016/0198-8859(90)90071-v.
  7. Kanda Y, Chiba S, Hirai H, et al. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation from family members other than HLA-identical siblings over the last decade (1991–2000). Blood. 2003;102(4):1541–7. doi: 10.1182/blood-2003-02-0430.
  8. Ruutu T, Gratwohl A, de Witte T, et al. Prophylaxis and treatment of GVHD: EBMT-ELN working group recommendations for a standardized practice. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2014;49(2):168–73. doi: 10.1038/bmt.2013.107.
  9. Flowers ME, Inamoto Y, Carpenter PA, et al. Comparative analysis of risk factors for acute graft-versus-host disease and for chronic graft-versus-host disease according to National Institutes of Health consensus criteria. 2011;117(11):3214–9. doi: 10.1182/blood-2010-08-302109.
  10. Finke J, Bethge WA, Schmoor C, et al. Standard graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis with or without anti-T-cell globulin in haematopoietic cell transplantation from matched unrelated donors: a randomised, open-label, multicentre phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(9):855–64. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70225-6.
  11. Soiffer RJ, LeRademacher J, Ho V, et al. Impact of immune modulation with anti-T-cell antibodies on the outcome of reduced-intensity allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for hematologic malignancies. 2011;117(25):6963–70. doi: 10.1182/blood-2011-01-332007.
  12. O’Donnell MR, Long GD, Parker PM, et al. Busulfan/cyclophosphamide as conditioning regimen for allogeneic bone marrow transplantation for myelodysplasia. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13(12):2973–9.
  13. Lehnert S, Rybka WB. Amplification of the graft-versus-host reaction by cyclophosphamide: dependence on timing of drug administration. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1994;13(4):473–7. doi: 10.1097/00007890-198606000-00002.
  14. Mayumi H, Himeno K, Tanaka K, et al. Drug-induced tolerance to allografts in mice: Xii. The relationships between tolerance, chimerism, and graft-versus-host disease. Transplantation. 1987;44(2):286–90. doi: 10.1097/00007890-19870800-00021.
  15. Luznik L, Jalla S, Engstrom LW, et al. Durable engraftment of major histocompatibility complex-incompatible cells after nonmyeloablative conditioning with fludarabine, low-dose total body irradiation, and posttransplantation cyclophosphamide. Blood. 2001;98(12):3456–64. doi: 10.1182/blood.v98.12.3456.
  16. Santos GW, Owens AH Jr. A comparison of the effects of selected cytotoxic agents on allogeneic skin graft survival in rats. Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp. 1965;116:327–40.
  17. Berenbaum MC. Prolongation of homograft survival in mice with single doses of cyclophosphamide. 1963;200(4901):84. doi: 10.1038/200084a0.
  18. Owens AH Jr, Santos GW. The effect of cytotoxic drugs on graft-versus-host disease in mice. Transplantation. 1971;11(4):378–82. doi: 10.1097/00007890-197104000-00004.
  19. Luznik L, O’Donnell PV, Symons HJ, et al. HLA-Haploidentical Bone Marrow Transplantation for Hematologic Malignancies Using Nonmyeloablative Conditioning and High-Dose, Posttransplantation Cyclophosphamide. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008;14(6):641–50. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2008.03.005.
  20. Przepiorka D, Weisdorf D, Martin P, et al. 1994 Consensus Conference on Acute GVHD Grading. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1995;15(6):825–8.
  21. Filipovich AH, Weisdorf D, Pavletic S, et al. National Institutes of Health consensus development project on criteria for clinical trials in chronic graft-versus-host disease: I. Diagnosis and staging working group report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2005;11(12):945–56. doi: 1016/j.bbmt.2005.09.004.
  22. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(2):580–637. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8.
  23. De Pauw B, Walsh TJ, Donnelly JP, et al. Revised definitions of invasive fungal disease from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) Consensus Group. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46(12):1813–21. doi: 10.1086/588660.
  24. Luznik L, Bolanos-Meade J, Zahuraket M, et al. High-dose cyclophosphamide as single-agent, short-course prophylaxis of graft-versus-host disease. 2010;115(16):3224–30. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-11-251595.
  25. Kanakry CG, Tsai HL, Bolanos-Meade J, et al. Single-agent GVHD prophylaxis with posttransplantation cyclophosphamide after myeloablative, HLA-matched BMT for AML, ALL, and MDS. 2014;124(25):3817–27. doi: 10.1182/blood-2014-07-587477.
  26. Bradstock KF, Bilmon I, Kwan J, et al. Single-Agent High-Dose Cyclophosphamide for Graft-versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis in Human Leukocyte Antigen-Matched Reduced-Intensity Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation Results in an Unacceptably High Rate of Severe Acute Graft-versus-Host Disease. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015;21(5):941–4. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2015.01.020.
  27. Holtick U, Chemnitz JM, Shimabukuro-Vornhagen A, et al. OCTET-CY: a phase II study to investigate the efficacy of post-transplant cyclophosphamide as sole graft-versus-host prophylaxis after allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. Eur J Haematol. 2015;96(1):27–35. doi: 10.1111/ejh.12541.
  28. Solomon SR, Sanacore M, Zhang X, et al. Calcineurin inhibitor-free graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis with post-transplantation cyclophosphamide and brief-course sirolimus following reduced-intensity peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014;20(11):1828–34. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2014.07.020.