Autologous stem cell transplantation for mantle cell lymphoma – single centre experience

Introduction

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a B-cell neoplasm characterized by monomorphic proliferation of small and medium-sized lymphoid cells expressing mature B-cell markers and IgM and/or IgD surface immunoglobulin. The t(11;14)(q13;q32) between IGH@ and cyclin D1 genes is thought to be the primary genetic event in the pathogenesis of MCL [1]. Mantle cell lymphoma is more frequently seen in males than in females (2 : 1), with a median age of 60 to 65 years [2]. Most patients have an advanced stage of disease at diagnosis with common extranodal involvement including bone marrow, spleen, liver and gastrointestinal tract [3]. The clinical course of MCL becomes aggressive with time and resistant to chemotherapy with a median survival of 3 to 5 years [4]. Mantle cell lymphoma remains incurable with conventional chemotherapy and responses are short-lived. High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) may increase progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), but survival curves do not eventually plateau [5]. Herein we report the outcome of ASCT performed in our centre for twenty patients diagnosed with MCL.

Material and methods

Patient selection and characteristics



Twenty patients (7 male and 13 female) at median age of 59 years (41–68 years) received ASCT in our centre between 2004 and 2010. The management of patients after diagnosis followed common standards, but due to the fact that some patients were referred for transplantation from other centres, not all data were available for all patients. A histological diagnosis was established by the local pathologist and overexpression of Cyclin D1 was confirmed by immunochemistry in all patients. The disease stage was evaluated according to the Ann Arbor staging system and the International Prognostic Index for Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MIPI) score was calculated as published elsewhere [6]. The diagnostic work-up included physical examination, blood and serum analysis, chest X-ray, and computed tomography of the neck, chest, abdomen and pelvis. Bone marrow biopsy was taken at diagnosis and then repeated at the time of transplant. Patients were eligible for ASCT if they fulfilled the following criteria:

• first or subsequent complete (CR) or partial remission (PR) after conventional chemotherapy;

• ECOG status 0 to 2;

• age < 70 years;

• adequate hepatic, renal and cardiac function.

All patients signed informed consent. The clinical characteristics of patients are presented in Table 1.



Treatment



Induction chemotherapy consisted of R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, prednisone) in 19 patients and R-CVAD (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) in 1. CR was achieved in 13 cases (65%). Seven patients proceeded to receive second line treatment including different chemotherapeutic schema: R-ESHAP (rituximab, cisplatin, methylprednisolone, etoposide, cytarabine; n = 3), R-DHAP (rituximab, cisplatin, cytarabine, dexamethasone; n = 2), R-FC (rituximab, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide; n = 1) and R-CVAD (n = 1). Second CR was demonstrated in 4 out of the 7 patients who achieved less than partial response (PR) after induction. Three remaining patients were given additional regimens and eventually met criteria for PR. Mobilized peripheral blood was the source of stem cells for ASCT in all patients. The IVE (ifosfamide, etoposide, epirubicin) regimen was used for mobilization. Granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) at 10 µg/kg/day was started from day +5 until the last day of apheresis. The number of 2 × 106 CD34-positive cells/kg was considered sufficient for ASCT, but in 3 patients the number of transplanted CD34-positive cells was below this threshold. The apheresis product was processed, frozen to –150°C, stored and re-infused after conditioning was completed. The preparative regimens included CBV (cyclophosphamide, BCNU, etoposide) in 18 and BEAM (BCNU, cytarabine, etoposide, melphalan) in 2 patients.



Response criteria



The response to therapy was evaluated at 1, 3 and 6 months after ASCT and 6 months thereafter. CR was defined as the disappearance of all disease-related symptoms and measurable lesions for at least 4 weeks; PR was defined as a > 50% decrease in the sum of the products of the two largest diameters of all measurable lesions for at least 4 weeks. Progressive disease was defined by any increase > 25% in the sum of the diameter of any measurable lesions or the appearance of a new lesion.



Statistical methods



The OS and PFS rates were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. All calculations were made from the date of transplantation. Comparisons between the variables were carried out by log-rank test. Statistical significance was defined at a p value < 0.05. Transplant-related mortality (TRM) was defined as death within 100 days of high-dose therapy not related to the disease, relapse and progression.

Results

Cell dose and engraftmentThe median number of transplanted nucleated cells was 2.6 × 108/kg (range 1.6–13.0) and the median number of CD34-positive cells was 5.5 × 106/kg (range 1.1–22.8). All patients engrafted. The median time to neutrophil recovery was 14 days (range 10–18) and platelet count > 50 × 109/l was noted after a median of 14 days (range 10–22). No patient died within 100 days after the transplant.



Adverse events and supportive care



Thirteen patients demonstrated infectious complications in the post-transplant period. Grade 3 or 4 non-hematological adverse events were not observed. Five patients developed fever with negative bacterial and fungal cultures and mucositis of grade 1 or 2 were noted in 4 cases. The other complications included proctitis (n = 2), gastritis (n = 10), pneumonia (n = 1) and laryngitis (n = 1). Five patients required G-CSF to speed up post-transplant regeneration. Median time of post-transplant hospitalization was 26 days (range 21–45).



Outcome and prognostic factors



The transplant-related mortality was 0% at day 100. Median OS and PFS were 48 and 29.8 months, respectively. The estimated 5-year OS and PFS were found to be 52% and 35%, respectively (Fig. 1). There was no significant difference in OS and PFS in terms of MIPI score and disease status at transplant. Median follow-ups from diagnosis and from ASCT were 51.5 months (range 20.8–112.7) and 36 months (range 11–73), respectively. Median time to relapse was 13 months (range 7–62). Ten patients died from disease recurrence and subsequent chemoresistance. Ten patients are alive: 8 in CR, whereas 2 patients relapsed and receive salvage regimens.

Discussion

Mantle cell lymphoma remains incurable with conventional chemotherapy including anthracycline-based chemotherapy or monoclonal antibody treatment [5]. Autologous stem cell transplantation has become an encouraging therapeutic option based on the results from small series of patients. Namely, it was documented that nine patients with recurrent MCL who underwent ASCT had superior OS and failure-free survival than 14 patients treated with anthracycline-containing combinations [7]. Another small retrospective study reported the outcome of ASCT in 8 MCL patients transplanted in CR or PR. After a median follow-up of 22 months all patients were in CR and toxicity related to ASCT was manageable [8]. In the largest retrospective study to date, which analyzed 195 patients with MCL reported to the European Blood and Bone Marrow Transplant (EBMTR) and Autologous Blood and Marrow Transplant (ABMTR) registries, the median survival of transplanted patients was 6 years with 5-year OS and PFS of 50% and 33% respectively. More EBMTR patients received total body irradiation (TBI) as part of conditioning and conditioning regimens varied between registries. The BEAM protocol predominated in EBMTR whereas the BEAC (BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine, cyclophosphamide) regime predominated in ABMTR. CBV conditioning was used in about 5% of EBMTR and ABMTR patients and it did not influence survival in multivariate analysis. Only disease status at transplant affected survival; patients had superior OS and PFS if transplanted in CR1 compared with those beyond CR1 [9]. The above-mentioned results were in line with our data; the 5-year OS and PFS were 52% and 35%, respectively. In contrast, we found that disease status (CR1 vs CR2/PR) did not influence OS and PFS.

It should be noted that our patients received uniform induction chemotherapy with the R-CHOP regimen and CR1 was achieved in 65% of patients. The median survival for the transplanted cohort was 5 years, which is 2 years longer than for historical series of patients treated with conventional chemotherapy [10]. Most patients from our cohort were transplanted after CBV conditioning with TRM at day 100 of 0%. However, one should realize that the CBV preparative regimen was found to be less favorable in terms of TRM and OS than BEAM for Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas in some previous studies [11, 12]. Due to the low number of patients transplanted after the BEAM protocol in our study, a comparison between protocols was not performed.

There are also several prospective studies showing the results of ASCT consolidation in first-line MCL. Most studies recruited between 20 and 62 patients and used different induction regimens. The results of these studies may suggest that patients in the ASCT arm had significantly higher PFS if compared with historical controls, but the effect on OS needs to be determined. Based on the above-mentioned studies, we may conclude that a disease-free plateau was not reached and all patients eventually will relapse [13–15]. In contrast, a recently published report by the Nordic Lymphoma Group [16] showed no relapses occurring after 5 years, which may suggest that we can cure a proportion of MCL patients. However, it should be mentioned that these patients received intensive front-line immunochemotherapy with in vivo rituximab-purged stem cell rescue. The 6-year OS and PFS were 70% and 54% respectively. It seems that the addition of rituximab and high-dose cytarabine may improve the final outcome. The same was also concluded by Tam et al. [17]. They found that a major improvement in the approach for MCL patients was associated with the addition of rituximab to CVAD combined chemotherapy. This therapy resulted in a 90% CR rate. It was demonstrated that ASCT in CR1 after R-CVAD resulted in PFS and OS at 6 years of 39% and 61%, respectively. Even better results after R-CVAD were also reported by others; OS was 78% at 5 years [18]. It was suggested that cytarabine remained the most active agent in CVAD treatment, but the optimal dose needs to be determined [19].

In our study, the median time to relapse was 13 months from ASCT, 50% of relapses occurred within the first 2 years from transplant, and there was only one disease recurrence after 5 years.

We did not find any difference in OS and PFS depending on MIPI score. It was probably due to the small number of patients in each subgroup. A more recent publication showed similar outcomes between good and intermediate risk groups whereas poor-risk patients were found to have significantly inferior survival [20]. It is noteworthy that ASCT for MCL was found to be a well-tolerated procedure and only mild infectious complications were observed in our study cohort. Post-transplant recovery was rapid and only a small proportion of patients required growth factors in order to accelerate neutrophil regeneration.

In conclusion, ASCT as a consolidation treatment for advanced-stage MCL seems to be an effective procedure with manageable adverse events. Recent studies suggest that intensive immunochemotherapy followed by stem cell rescue may result in the improvement of OS and PFS in MCL with a proportion of patients being cured.



The authors declare no conflict of interests.

References

 1. Swerdlow SH, Campo E, Seto M, Muller-Hermelink HK. Mantle cell lymphoma In: World Health Organization Classification of Tumours: Tumours of Haematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissue. Swierdlow S, Campo E, Harris NL, Jaffe ES, Pileri SA, Stein H, Thiele J, Vardiman JW (eds.). International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon 2008; 68-73.

 2. Argatoff LH, Connors JM, Klasa RJ, Horsman DE, Gascoyne RD. Mantle cell lymphoma: a clinicopathologic study of 80 cases. Blood 1997; 89: 2067-78.

 3. Bosch F, López-Guillermo A, Campo E, et al. Mantle cell lymphoma: presenting features, response to therapy, and prognostic factors. Cancer 1998; 82: 567-75.

 4. Herrmann A, Hoster E, Zwingers T, et al. Improvement of overall survival in advanced stage mantle cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 511-8.

 5. Ghielmini M, Zucca E. How I treat mantle cell lymphoma. Blood 2009; 114: 1469-76.

 6. Hoster E, Dreyling M, Klapper W, et al.; German Low Grade Lymphoma Study Group (GLSG); European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Network. A new prognostic index (MIPI) for patients with advanced-stage mantle cell lymphoma. Blood 2008; 111: 558-65.

 7. Stewart DA, Vose JM, Weisenburger DD, et al. The role of high-dose therapy and autologous hematopoitic stem cell transplantation for mantle cell lymphoma. Ann Oncol 1995; 6: 263-6.

 8. Kröger N, Hoffknecht M, Dreger P, et al. Long-term disease-free survival of patients with advanced mantle-cell lymphoma following high-dose chemotherapy. Bone Marrow Transplant 1998; 21: 55-7.

 9. Vandenberghe E, Ruiz de Elvira C, Loberiza FR, et al. Outcome of autologous transplantation for mantle cell lymphoma: a study by the European Blood and Bone Marrow Transplant and Autologous Blood and Marrow Transplant Registries. Br J Haematol 2003; 120: 793-800.

10. Vandenberghe E, De Wolf-Peeters C, Vaughan Hudson G, Vaughan Hudson B, Pittaluga S, Anderson L, Linch DC. The clinical outcome of 65 cases of mantle cell lymphoma initially treated with non-intensive therapy by the BNLI. Br J Haematol 1997; 99: 842-7.

11. Salar A, Sierra J, Gandarillas M, et al. Autologous stem cell transplantation for clinically aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: the role of preparative regimens. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001; 27: 405-12.

12. Puig N, de la Rubia J, Remigia MJ, et al. Morbidity and transplant-related mortality of CBV and BEAM preparative regimens for patients with lymphoid malignancies undergoing autologous stem-cell transplantation. Leuk Lymphoma 2006; 47: 1488-94.

13. Mangel J, Leitch HA, Connors JM, et al. Intensive chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation plus rituximab is superior to conventional chemotherapy for newly diagnosed advanced stage mantle-cell lymphoma: a matched pair analysis. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 283-90.

14. Evens AM, Winter JN, Hou N, et al. A phase II clinical trial of intensive chemotherapy followed by consolidative stem cell transplant: long-term follow-up in newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma. Br J Haematol 2008; 140: 385-93.

15. Dreyling M, Lenz G, Hoster E, et al. Early consolidation by myeloablative radiochemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation in first remission significantly prolongs progression-free survival in mantle-cell lymphoma: results of a prospective randomized trial of the European MCL Network. Blood 2005; 105: 2677-84.

16. Geisler CH, Kolstad A, Laurell A, et al.; Nordic Lymphoma Group. Long-term progression-free survival of mantle cell lymphoma after intensive front-line immunochemotherapy with in vivo-purged stem cell rescue: a nonrandomized phase 2 multicenter study by the Nordic Lymphoma Group. Blood 2008; 112: 2687-93.

17. Tam CS, Bassett R, Ledesma C, et al. Mature results of the MD Anderson Cancer Center risk-adapted transplantation strategy in mantle cell lymphoma. Blood 2008; 112: 2687-93.

18. Vose JM, Loberiza R, Bierman J, et al. The addition of stem cell transplantation following induction chemotherapy improves overall survival in mantle cell lymphoma patients who achieve a complete response. Proc Eur Hematol Assoc 2012; 27: 249a.

19. Damon LE, Johnson JL, Niedzwiecki D, et al. Immunochemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation for untreated patients

with mantle cell lymphoma. CALGB 59909. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 6101-8.

20. Geisler CH, Kolstad A, Laurell A, et al. The Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (MIPI) is superior to the International Prognostic Index (IPI) in predicting survival following intensive first-line immunochemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Blood 2010; 115: 1530-3.



Address for correspondence



Grzegorz Helbig MD, PhD

Department of Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation

Silesian Medical University

Dąbrowskiego 25

40-032 Katowice

e-mail: ghelbig@o2.pl



Submitted: 3.10.2012

Accepted: 21.01.2013