慢性淋巴细胞白血病的造血干细胞移植治疗
2013-01-21杨申淼许兰平
杨申淼, 江 倩, 许兰平
慢性淋巴细胞白血病的造血干细胞移植治疗
杨申淼, 江 倩, 许兰平*
(北京大学人民医院血液病研究所, 北京 100044)
慢性淋巴细胞白血病(CLL)存在很大的临床异质性。尽管免疫化疗方案的进步带来了显著的疗效,部分患者仍可在短期内发生疾病进展,或处于疾病难治耐药的状态。由于移植物抗CLL效应的存在,异基因造血干细胞移植的根治性意义获得肯定。年轻CLL患者如具有高危因素,包括:嘌呤类似物耐药或治疗后早期复发,以及具有17p(TP53位点)缺失和TP53突变,异基因造血干细胞移植是合理的治疗选择。减低强度的预处理方案有效降低了患者的治疗相关死亡率。
慢性淋巴细胞白血病; 造血干细胞移植
慢性淋巴细胞白血病(chronic lymphocytic leukemia,CLL)是一种在临床特点上存在巨大异质性的惰性淋巴增殖性疾病。尽管有三分之一的患者可以很多年不需要治疗[1],但是也有部分患者短期内疾病进展,进而死亡。尽管以利妥昔单抗(Rituximab,R)联合氟达拉滨(Fludarabine,F)、环磷酰胺(Cyclophosphamide,C)为代表的免疫化疗策略不论做为一线诱导还是二线挽救方案,都带来了显著的疗效[2−6]。但是仍有患者处于难治耐药的状态。并且随着随访时间的延长,不论患者的无病生存还是总体生存都始终处于下降的过程中[3,4],说明传统的药物治疗并不能达到疾病根治的目的。而造血干细胞移植作为可能达到根治目标的治疗方法,近十几年来受到关注并得到了深入研究。
1 异基因造血干细胞移植
1.1 适应证
CLL是一个老年人群高发的疾病。中位诊断年龄为70~72岁。但是,35%~40%的患者小于65岁,约三分之一的患者在60岁以下[7−9]。CLL在年轻患者往往具有更高的侵袭性,缩短年轻患者预期寿命的情况比老年患者更为严重[10−13]。
20世纪70年代,Rai和Binet首先应用CLL的临床特点建立了预后分层系统[14,15]。以后深入的实验室研究发现了一系列具有重大预后价值的生物学标志,与临床特点相结合,使得高危、超高危CLL的识别成为可能。当前,超高危CLL的定义是从治疗开始总体生存时间小于24到36个月的患者人群。在此定义基础上,超高危CLL包括具有17p(TP53位点)缺失、TP53突变、氟达拉滨耐药和FCR、FC等强方案治疗后24个月内复发的患者[16]。
2007年欧洲骨髓移植组(EBMT)发表了有关异基因造血干细胞移植(alloegeneic stem cell transplantation,allo-SCT)适应证的共识:循证医学证明allo-SCT对高危CLL有效;Allo-SCT对具有如下特点的年轻患者是合理的治疗选择:(1)嘌呤类似物治疗无效或12个月之内复发;(2)嘌呤类似物为基础的联合方案或自体移植治疗后获得疗效,但24个月内复发;(3)伴TP53异常需要治疗的患者[17]。
2 移植物抗CLL效应
早期的探索性研究[18,19]验证了allo-SCT治疗CLL的可行性。同时还显示了allo-SCT与auto-SCT都可以带给患者完全缓解(complete response,CR)的疗效,两组分别为7/11和6/11[19]。德国的研究对9例免疫球蛋白重链可变区(IgVH)未突变的高危CLL患者进行allo-SCT,中位随访25个月,出现慢性移植物抗宿主病(graft--host disease,GVHD)或进行了供者淋巴细胞输注(Donor lymphocyte infusion,DLI)的7例患者持续保持临床和分子学缓解[20]。Dana-Farber肿瘤中心的研究者进行的去除T细胞的allo-SCT与同期auto-SCT的结果相似,6年的无疾病生存(progression free survival,PFS)率分别为(24%±9%)和(30%±4%)。但是对7例移植后复发的患者进行DLI,6例获得了明确的治疗反应[21]。M.D.Anderson肿瘤中心在前瞻性研究中对allo-SCT时疾病处于耐药状态和移植后+90天供者T细胞比例≤95%的患者进行常规DLI干预,获得了47%(20/43)的CR率,中位生存时间超过47个月以上[22]。德国CLL研究组报告的CLL3X试验的结果显示allo-SCT后所有微小残留病(minimal residual disease,MRD)获得清除的患者,都通过减停免疫抑制剂或DLI发生了慢性GVHD[23]。CLL3X的终期结果报告15例患者,包括8例因临床复发、6例因MRD、1例因不完全嵌合状态,接受了DLI,其中3例MRD和2例复发的患者获得了完全分子学缓解[24]。综上所述,临床数据强烈提示移植物抗CLL效应具有根治意义。
西雅图Fred Hutchison肿瘤中心报告了移植物抗CLL效应的直接证据:在allo-SCT后只有获得完全缓解的患者体内发育出了CLL特异性的T细胞,而没有获得缓解的患者,即使发生了GVHD,也不能在体内找到这群细胞。这些CLL反应性T细胞特异性地作用于CLL细胞上表达的微小组织相容性抗原以及肿瘤特异性抗原。提示移植物抗白血病(graft versus leukemia,GVL)效应与GVHD在本质上存在差别。而另一方面所有获得CR的患者都发生了急、慢性GVHD[25]。说明在当前的allo-SCT模式下GVL并没有与GVHD完全分离。
对移植物抗CLL效应中微小组织相容性抗原的限制性M.D.Anderson肿瘤中心进行了深入研究,发现HLA-A1+/A2-/B44-的患者5年的PFS可达68%,而不具备这三种分子特点的患者只有15%(=0.02)[22]。
因此,allo-SCT平台提供的GVL效应可以有效清除CLL细胞,是CLL根治的基础。
3 预处理方案
3.1 清髓性的预处理方案
EBMT对清髓性方案的定义:白消安剂量大于10mg/kg,或马法兰剂量大于150mg/m2,或者全身照射(total body irradiation,TBI)剂量大于8Gy[26]。传统的清髓性的预处理方案包括TBI(10-16Gy)-环磷酰胺(CY)和白消安(BU)-CY为基础的方案[27−31]。也有增加了依托泊苷(VP16)、卡莫司汀(BCNU)的尝试[32,33]。IBMTR/EBMT登记的长期随访数据显示,清髓性allo-SCT后10年的无病生存(disease free survival,DFS)率为37%,总体生存(overall survival,OS)率为41.2%[27,28]。Mayo Clinic随访的12例患者10年的PFS率为42%,OS率为50%[31]。可见,allo-SCT是CLL根治性的治疗手段。但是,尽管各研究组将患者的中位年龄严格控制在41~51岁,远远低于总体CLL患者的中位年龄,但是移植相关的死亡率却高达27%~48%[27−34]。
M.D.Anderson肿瘤中心发现移植时是否存在疾病耐药是影响清髓性allo-SCT后长期生存的重要因素:耐药患者的5年OS率为37%,明显低于化疗敏感者78%的结果(=0.05)[35]。
3.2 减低预处理强度方案
3.2.1 安全性与疗效 近10年来,减低预处理强度(reduced intensive conditioning,RIC)的移植方式已经成为CLL移植的主流。由于减低了预处理毒性,接受RIC移植患者的年龄比清髓性方案提高了10岁左右,上升到50~57岁,但是移植相关死亡率却降至14%~34%[24,26,33,38−44]。
出于对预处理毒性的担忧,RIC方案开始受到关注。EBMT对清髓性方案与RIC方案进行了危险度配对的回顾性比较。RIC方案组治疗相关死亡率明显降低(HR=0.4,=0.03),但是存在复发率升高的趋势,RIC组为28%,而清髓组为11%(=0.008)。然而最终这些作用并未转化为生存获益,不论是RIC方案还是清髓方案2年OS率均为70%;RIC方案2年无事件生存(event free survival,EFS)率为58%,清髓方案为62%(=0.88)[36]。但Fred Hutchinson肿瘤中心对26例CLL患者和194例其他类型淋巴瘤进行了回顾性研究,结果显示伴有基础疾病的CLL患者在RIC移植后3年OS率为44%,优于传统预处理方案35%的结果(=0.04),而这一差别在无基础疾病的患者并不明显(=0.75)。同时研究还发现清髓方案与RIC方案具有相似的复发率:在惰性淋巴瘤组相对危险度(hazard ratio,HR)为0.56(=0.33),说明预处理方案的强弱并未影响到包含CLL在内的惰性淋巴瘤的肿瘤控制[37]。
预处理剂量的减低没有影响患者植入,中性粒细胞>500/µl的时间在移植后10~17.5d[39−41]。骨髓毒性下降使得40%~61%的患者不需要输注血小板[24,42,43]。移植后+28~+30d完全供者型的比例达到67%~68%[40,42];+80~+90d达到83%~100%[24,42]。DLI成为普遍采用的移植后预防、治疗复发的干预模式。RIC移植联合DLI干预下,Ⅱ-Ⅳ度急性GVHD的发生率为34%~55%。慢性GVHD的发生率可以高达57%~76%,并且以广泛型为主,占到21%~53%。患者5年的PFS为22%~39%,而OS可以达到39%~70%[24,39,42,43]。
3.2.2 方案 EBMT对各种预处理方案进行了比较评价,认为骨髓抑制的强弱顺序:氟达拉滨(Flu)+马法兰(Mel)±阿伦单抗(Alem)>Flu+Bu±抗胸腺球蛋白(ATG)>Flu+Cy>Flu+TBI(2Gy);免疫抑制的强弱顺序:Flu+Mel+Alem>Flu+Bu+ATG>Flu+Cy>Flu+Mel和Flu+Bu>Flu+TBI(2Gy)[45]。
单抗的加入增加了预处理方案的免疫抑制强度。利妥昔单抗是抗人CD20的单克隆抗体。增高剂量的利妥昔单抗(375mg/m2,-13d;1000mg/m2,-6d,+1d,+8d)加入到惰性淋巴瘤的RIC方案中以后,早期报道急性GVHD的发生率降低到20%[46]。由于50%(43/86)的高危患者在移植后进行了增高剂量的利妥昔单抗联合DLI的免疫干预,Ⅱ-Ⅳ度aGVHD的发生率有所升高,达到37%[22]。在这些数据的鼓舞下,法国一项多中心的前瞻性研究也把利妥昔单抗(375mg/m2,-5d;500mg/m2,+1d,+8d)联合到Flu+TBI的RIC方案中,确证了利妥昔单抗减少了急性GVHD的发生率,并最终使OS(HR=0.1,=0.02)和EFS(HR=0.1,=0.035)得到改善[47]。
ATG(10mg/kg,-4d~-1d)增强了T细胞的功能抑制,主要用于无关供者移植[24,39]。
阿伦单抗是人CD52的单克隆抗体,作为体内去T的方法得到了充分的研究。英国外周血和骨髓移植研究学会制定的RIC的预处理方案将Flu+Mel联合阿伦单抗(40~60mg,-2d~-1d)。研究对象中包含了32%无关HLA全合供者和10%无关HLA不合供者。急、慢性GVHD的发生率分别为41%和33%[48]。英国和西班牙双中心的回顾性研究中将阿伦单抗20~100mg作为RIC移植后的免疫抑制治疗,有效地将GVHD的发生率降低到19%的低水平[44]。但是阿伦单抗在预处理中的应用也带来了相应的问题。首先是感染:机会性感染成为非复发死亡(non-relapse mortality,NRM)的主要原因,因感染死亡的患者占到22%[47]。西班牙的结果显示移植后阿伦单抗+环胞素A的GVHD预防方案下病毒感染的发生率为68%,而环胞素A+甲氨喋呤+骁悉预防治疗后为43%,有升高的趋势(=0.062)[49]。其次是植入不良:British Columbia大学发现阿伦单抗的应用阻碍了患者达到完全供者型,+100d内达到90%以上供者核型的病例只有51.62%(16/31)[50]。CLL3X研究的初期阶段探索了Flu+TBI联合阿伦单抗体内去T的方案,由于植入不良的问题而更改了预处理方案,废弃了阿伦单抗的应用[24]。感染和植入不良带来了生存影响:EBMT登记的RIC allo-SCT治疗伴17p-的CLL患者,多因素分析显示阿伦单抗用于体内去T是PFS的不良预后因素[26]。British Columbia大学发现预处理方案中应用阿伦单抗造成OS明显下降[50]。CLL3X研究中阿伦单抗体内去T对EFS、OS和NRM具有显著的不良影响[24]。根据这些数据,一些中心已经放弃阿伦单抗在RIC方案中的应用[50]。
3.2.3 移植的危险因素 M.D.Anderson肿瘤中心发现:移植时淋巴结≥5cm是移植后复发的不良预后因素;移植时患者是CR还是部分缓解(partial response,PR)状态并不影响最终的结果[43]。而类似于清髓性移植,移植时疾病耐药也是RIC移植后PFS、OS的不良预后因素[24,41,42]。大包块、耐药与PR同样是患者体内存在肿瘤负荷的状态,但是最终移植的结果却不同,说明预处理方案进一步渗透、杀灭CLL细胞的作用在allo-SCT提供的免疫治疗为主的平台上仍有一定的意义[43]。Dana-Farber肿瘤中心的研究还显示:既往化疗次数和骨髓的受累程度也是PFS和OS的不良预后因素[41]。由此也提示了需要把握时机,高危患者不能等待过久,避免发生全面耐药,一旦经免疫化疗获得合理的疗效,就应该尽早移植[45]。最近建立的RIC移植治疗CLL的预后模型包含了:移植时处于缓解状态、乳酸脱氢酶、并发症以及淋巴细胞计数4个危险因素,具有0、1、2或≥3个危险因素的患者的5年PFS率分别是83%,63%,24%和6%(<0.0001)[51]。
绝大多数研究显示:作为CLL的高危因素ZAP-70、CD38、17p-等不良分子和遗传学特点在allo-SCT后已不再影响患者的复发和生存[20,24,40,42]。但是,British Columbia大学回顾性研究的结果却发现17p-是影响移植疗效的不良预后因素,进一步分析显示研究包含的17p-患者大多是反复治疗耐药、具有包块的晚期患者。于是他们将allo-SCT列入到17p-患者的初始治疗方案中,经过早期移植,结果得到明显改善[49]。可见,allo-SCT模式是克服高危CLL的有力手段,而合适的移植时机是高危CLL获益于移植的关键问题。
当前各家CLL的临床指南都把allo-SCT作为一线治疗纳入到具有17p-或TP53突变的极高危患者的推荐中[52−54]。NCCN强调:17p-患者的移植时机是在一线化疗后获得治疗反应(CR或PR)时。11q-的患者,如果一线免疫化疗后疗效是PR,也需要考虑allo-SCT。对于不具有高危细胞遗传学异常的患者在一线单药治疗后1~2年、免疫化疗后3年内短期复发,则需要在挽救性治疗后进行allo-SCT[52,54]。
4 自体造血干细胞移植
20世纪90年代初期开始,Dana Farber,M.D.Anderson肿瘤中心以及德国、法国的研究中心对CLL患者大剂量化疗后造血干细胞移植治疗在可行性方面进行了初步探索。早期结果显示:高危CLL患者在自体造血干细胞移植(autologous stem cell transplantation,auto-SCT)后2年内可以保持持续的临床缓解[18,19,55,56]。但是当随访时间延长到3年以上,复发率也随之上升,可高达50%以上[57,58]。MRD的检测发现绝大多数患者在auto-SCT后,白血病克隆并未得到完全清除[58]。
Auto-SCT是否可以优于常规化疗,至今仍无前瞻性的对比研究来做回答。2004年德国基尔和海德堡大学将auto-SCT和一线烷化剂为主、二线氟达拉滨为主的常规化疗进行了危险度配对的比较。结果显示:auto-SCT组显示出明显的生存优势(HR 0.38,=0.04),在IgVH无突变的高危患者也是如此[59]。
但是,法国协作组和EBMT完成了CLL经过一线或二线化疗后分别给予auto-SCT或是停药观察的前瞻性随机对照研究,得出了相同的结果:auto-SCT组具有更高的EFS和PFS,却并未在OS上获益。作为一线疗效欠佳患者的挽救性治疗,auto-SCT并未优于FC方案化疗[60,61]。尽管还没有研究把auto-SCT与当前CLL治疗的金标准RFC方案进行直接比较,但是auto-SCT一线应用后5年EFS率42%,5年OS率86%的数据与RFC作为一线方案6年EFS率51%,6年OS率77%的结果相似[3,60]。由此2011年Blood杂志上导向性的专家评论指出auto-SCT不适用于CLL的治疗[62]。还需警惕的是CLL患者在auto-SCT治疗后二次肿瘤发生率可以升高[21,63,64]。因此,auto-SCT在CLL指南中已不再作为治疗推荐。
5 结 论
近10年来,针对CLL新方法及新治疗不断涌现:利妥昔单抗、阿伦单抗、ofatumumab、obinutuzumab等新的单抗,氟达拉滨、克拉屈滨等嘌呤类似物,以及绽放新生命的老烷化剂苯达莫司汀,还有近年来倍受关注的PI3K激酶抑制剂idelalisib和Bruton激酶抑制剂ibrutinib等,已经改变、并还将改变更多高危、难治、复发CLL患者的预后。明确的移植物抗CLL效应是推动对CLL患者体内的免疫环境进行深入研究、推动allo-SCT及其他免疫治疗方案不断优化的原动力。而当前对于相对年轻,没有伴发基础疾病的高危、难治、复发CLL患者,allo-SCT仍是重要的根治手段。
[1] Dighiero G, Hamblin TJ. Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia[J]. Lancet, 2008, 371(9617): 1017−1029.
[2] Byrd JC, Peterson BL, Morrison VA,. Randomized phase 2 study of fludarabine with concurrent versus sequential treatment with rituximab in symptomatic, untreated patients with B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia: results from Cancer and Leukemia Group B 9712 (CALGB 9712)[J]. Blood, 2003, 101(1): 6−14.
[3] Tam CS, O’Brien S, Wierda W,. Long-term results of the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab regimen as initial therapy of chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Blood, 2008, 112(4): 975−980.
[4] Hallek M, Fischer K, Fingerle-Rowson G,. Addition of rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial[J]. Lancet, 2010, 376(9747): 1164−1174.
[5] Robak T, Dmoszynska A, Solal-Céligny P,. Rituximab plus fludarabine and cyclophosphamide prolongs progression-free survival compared with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide alone in previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2010, 28(10): 1756−1765.
[6] Badoux XC, Keating MJ, Wang X,. Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab chemoimmunotherapy is highly effective treatment for relapsed patients with CLL[J]. Blood, 2011, 117(11): 3016−3024.
[7] Kristinsson SY, Dickman PW, Wilson WH,. Improved survival in chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the past decade: a population-based study including 11,179 patients diagnosed between 1973-2003 in Sweden[J]. Haematologica, 2009, 94(9): 1259−1265.
[8] Byrd JC, Stilgenbauer S, Flin IW. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program[M]. 2004: 163−183.
[9] Gribben JG. How I treat CLL up-front[J]. Blood, 2010, 115(2): 187−197.
[10] Montserrat E, Gomis F, Vallespi T,. Presenting features and prognosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia in younger adults[J]. Blood, 1991, 78(6): 1545−1551.
[11] Abrisqueta P, Pereira A, Rozman C,. Improving survival in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (1980-2008): the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona experience[J]. Blood, 2009, 114(10): 2044−2050.
[12] Klepfish A, Rachmilewitz EA, Sarid M,. Evaluating the impact of age and disease on survival of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients by a new method[J]. Int J Clin Pract, 2009, 63(11): 1601−1603.
[13] Mauro FR, Foa R, Giannarelli D,. Clinical characteristics and outcome of young chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients: a single institution study of 204 cases[J]. Blood, 1999, 94(2): 448−454.
[14] Rai KR, Sawitsky A, Cronkite EP,. Clinical staging of chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Blood, 1975, 46: 219−234.
[15] Binet JL, Lepoprier M, Dighiero G,. A clinical staging system for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: prognostic significance[J]. Cancer, 1977, 40: 855−864.
[16] Stilgenbauer S, Zenz T. Understanding and managing ultra high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program[M]. 2010: 481−488.
[17] Dreger P, Corradini P, Kimby E,. Indications for allogeneic stem cell transplantation in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: the EBMT transplant consensus[J]. Leukemia, 2007, 21(1): 12−17.
[18] Rabinowe SN, Soiffer RJ, Gribben JG,. Autologous and allogeneic bone marrow transplantation for poor prognosis patients with B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Blood, 1993, 82(4): 1366−1376.
[19] Khouri IF, Keating MJ, Vriesendorp HM,. Autologous and allogeneic bone marrow transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: preliminary results[J]. J Clin Oncol, 1994, 12(4): 748−758.
[20] Ritgen M, Stilgenbauer S, von Neuhoff N,. Graft-versus-leukemia activity may overcome therapeutic resistance of chronic lymphocytic leukemia with unmutated immunoglobulin variable heavy-chain gene status: implications of minimal residual disease measurement with quantitative PCR[J]. Blood, 2004, 104(): 2600−2602.
[21] Gribben JG, Zahrieh D, Stephans K,. Autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantations for poor-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Blood, 2005, 106(13): 4389−4396.
[22] Khouri IF, Bassett R, Poindexter N,. Nonmyeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation in relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: long-term follow-up, prognostic factors, and effect of human leukocyte histocompatibility antigen subtype on outcome[J]. Cancer, 2011, 117(20): 4679−4688.
[23] Ritgen M, Böttcher S, Stilgenbauer S,. Quantitative MRD monitoring identifies distinct GVL response patterns after allogeneic stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: results from the GCLLSG CLL3X trial[J]. Leukemia, 2008, 22(7): 1377−1386.
[24] Dreger P, Döhner H, Ritgen M,. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation provides durable disease control in poor-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia: long-term clinical and MRD results of the GCLLSG CLL3X trial[J]. Blood, 2010, 116(14): 2438−2447.
[25] Nishida T, Hudecek M, Kostic A,. Development of tumor-reactive T cells after nonmyeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant for chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2009, 15(14): 4759−4768.
[26] Schetelig J, van Biezen A, Brand R,. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia with 17p deletion: a retrospective European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation analysis[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2008, 26(31): 5094−5100.
[27] Michallet M, Archimbaud E, Bandini G,. HLA-identical sibling bone marrow transplantation in younger patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry[J]. Ann Intern Med, 1996, 124(3): 311−315.
[28] Michallet MM, Michallet AS, Le QH,. Conventional HLA-identical sibling bone marrow transplantation is able to cure chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a study from the EBMT and IBMT registries[J]. Blood, 2003, 102: 474A. Abstract.
[29] Doney KC, Chauncey T, Appelbaum FR,. Allogeneic related donor hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Bone Marrow Transplant, 2002, 29(10): 817−823.
[30] Toze CL, Galal A, Barnett MJ,. Myeloablative allografting for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: evidence for a potent graft-versus-leukemia effect associated with graft-versus-host disease[J]. Bone Marrow Transplant, 2005, 36(9): 825−830.
[31] Malhotra P, Hogan WJ, Litzow MR,. Long-term outcome of allogeneic stem cell transplantation in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: analysis after a minimum follow-up of 5 years[J]. Leuk Lymphoma, 2008, 49(9): 1724−1730.
[32] Pavletic ZS, Arrowsmith ER, Bierman PJ,. Outcome of allogeneic stem cell transplantation for B cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Bone Marrow Transplant, 2000, 25(7): 717−722.
[33] Peres E, Braun T, Krijanovski O,. Reduced intensity versus full myeloablative stem cell transplant for advanced CLL[J]. Bone Marrow Transplant, 2009, 44(9): 579−583.
[34] Pavletic ZS, Khouri IF, Haagenson M,. Unrelated donor marrow transplantation for B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia after using myeloablative conditioning: results from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant research[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2005, 23(24): 5788−5794.
[35] Khouri IF, Keating MJ, Saliba RM,. Long-term follow-up of patients with CLL treated with allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation[J]. Cytotherapy, 2002, 4(3): 217−221.
[36] Dreger P, Brand R, Milligan D,. Reduced intensity conditioning lowers treatment-related mortality of allogeneic stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a population matched analysis[J]. Leukemia, 2005, 19(6): 1029−1033.
[37] Sorror ML, Storer BE, Maloney DG,. Outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation with nonmyeloablative or myeloablative conditioning regimens for treatment of lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Blood, 2008, 111(1): 446−452.
[38] Dreger P, Brand R, Hansz J,. Treatment-related mortality and graft-versus-leukemia activity after allogeneic stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia using intensity-reduced conditionin[J]. Leukemia, 2003, 17(5): 841−848.
[39] Schetelig J, Thiede C, Bornhauser M,. Evidence of a graft--leukemia effect in chronic lymphocytic leukemia after reduced-intensity conditioning and allogeneic stem-cell transplantation: the Cooperative German Transplant Study Group[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2003, 21(14): 2747−2753.
[40] Caballero D, Garcia-Marco JA, Martino R,. Allogeneic transplant with reduced intensity conditioning regimens may overcome the poor prognosis of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia with unmutated immunoglobulin variable heavy-chain gene and chromosomal abnormalities (11q- and 17p-)[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2005, 11(21): 7757−7763.
[41] Brown JR, Kim HT, Li S,. Predictors of improved progression-free survival after nonmyeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation for advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant, 2006, 12(10): 1056−1064.
[42] Khouri IF, Saliba RM, Admirand J,. Graft--leukaemia effect after non-myeloablative hematopoietic transplantation can overcome the unfavourable expression of ZAP-70 in refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia[J]. Br J Haematol, 2007: 137(4): 355−363.
[43] Sorror ML, Storer BE, Sandmaier B,. Five-year follow-up of patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia treated with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation after nonmyeloablative conditioning[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2008, 26(30): 4912−4920.
[44] Delgado J, Pillai S, Phillips N,. Does reduced-intensity allogeneic transplantation confer a survival advantage to patients with poor prognosis chronic lymphocytic leukaemia? A case-control retrospective analysis[J]. Ann Oncol, 2009, 20(12): 2007−2012.
[45] Delgado J, Milligan DW, Dreger P. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: ready for prime time[J]? Blood, 2009, 114(13): 2581−2588.
[46] Khouri IF, Saliba RM, Giralt SA,. Nonablative allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation as adoptive immunotherapy for indolent lymphoma: low incidence of toxicity, acute graft-versus-host disease, and treatmentrelated mortality[J]. Blood, 2001, 98(13): 3595−3599.
[47] Michallet M, Socié G, Mohty M,. Rituximab, fludarabine, and total body irradiation as conditioning regimen before allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia: long-term prospective multicenter study[J]. Exp Hematol, 2013, 41(2): 127−133.
[48] Delgado J, Thomson K, Russell N,. Results of alemtuzumab based reduced-intensity allogeneic transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a British Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation Study[J]. Blood, 2006, 107(4): 1724−1730.
[49] Delgado J, Pillai S, Benjamin R,. The effect ofT cell depletion with alemtuzumab on reduced-intensity allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant, 2008, 14(11): 1288−1297.
[50] Toze CL, Dalal CB, Nevill TJ,. Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: outcome in a 20-year cohort[J]. Br J Haematol, 2012, 158(2): 174−185.
[51] Brown JR, Kim HT, Armand P,. Long-term follow-up of reduced-intensity allogeneic stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: prognostic model to predict outcome[J]. Leukemia, 2013, 27(2): 362−369.
[52] 中华医学会血液学分会. 中华血液学杂志[J]. 2011, 32, 498−501.
[53] Eichhorst B, Dreyling M, Robak T,. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up[J]. Ann Oncol, 2011, 22(Suppl 6): vi50−54.
[54] NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphomas version 2.2012.
[55] Dreger P, von Neuhoff N, Kuse R,. Early stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a chance for cure[J]? Br J Cancer, 1998, 77(12): 2291−2297.
[56] Sutton L, Maloum K, Gonzalez H,. Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation as salvage treatment for advanced B cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Leukemia, 1998, 12(11): 1699−1707.
[57] Pavletic ZS, Bierman PJ, Vose JM,. High incidence of relapse after autologous stem-cell transplantation for B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma[J]. Ann Oncol, 1998, 9(9): 1023−1026.
[58] Moreno C, Villamor N, Colomer D,. Clinical significance of minimal residual disease, as assessed by different techniques, after stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia[J]. Blood, 2006, 107(11): 4563−4569.
[59] Dreger P, Stilgenbauer S, Benner A,. The prognostic impact of autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a risk-matched analysis based on the VH gene mutational status[J]. Blood, 2004, 103(7): 2850−2858.
[60] Sutton L, Chevret S, Tournilhac O,. Autologous stem cell transplantation as first-line treatment strategy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial from the SFGM-TC and GFLLC[J]. Blood, 2011, 117(23): 6109−6119.
[61] Michallet M, Dreger P, Sutton L,. Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: results of the European intergroup randomized trial comparing autograftingobservation[J]. Blood, 2011, 117(5): 1561−1521.
[62] Montserrat E, Gribben JG. Autografting CLL: the game is over[J]. Blood, 2011, 117(23): 6057−6058.
[63] Jantunen E, Itala M, Siitonen T,. Late non-relapse mortality among adult autologous stem cell transplant recipients: a nation-wide analysis of 1,482 patients transplanted in 1990-2003[J]. Eur J Haematol, 2006, 77(2): 114−119.
[64] Milligan DW, Kochethu G, Dearden C,. High incidence of myelodysplasia and secondary leukaemia in the UK Medical Research Council Pilot of autografting in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia[J]. Br J Haematol, 2006, 133(2):173−175.
(编辑: 王雪萍)
Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia
YANG Shen-Miao, JIANG Qian, XU Lan-Ping*
(Institute of Hematology, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing 100044, China)
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia(CLL) is an indolent lymphoproliferative disorder with great clinical heterogeneity. The immunochemotherapeutic regimens have improved the outcome of majority of the patients. Nonetheless, in some patients, the disease progresses shortly after the immunochemotherapy, while in others, it becomes refractory and drug resistant. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation(allo-SCT) potentially cures CLL due to the graftCLL effect. It has been wildly accepted that allo-SCT is a good option for young CLL patients with high risk factors, including purine analogue resistance, early relapse after purine analogue-based treatment, and 17p deletion and TP53 mutation. Reduced-intensity conditioning regimens effectively decrease the treatment-related mortality.
chronic lymphocytic leukemia; hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
(81200359).
R733.72
A
10.3724/SP.J.1264.2013.00147
2013−07−04;
2013−08−05
国家自然科学基金青年项目(81200359)
许兰平, Tel: 010-88326000, E-mail: lpxu_0415@sina.com