Secondary solid cancer screening following hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) recipients have a substantial risk of developing secondary solid cancers, particularly beyond 5 years after HCT and without reaching a plateau overtime. A working group was established through the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research and the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation with the goal to facilitate implementation of cancer screening appropriate to HCT recipients. The working group reviewed guidelines and methods for cancer screening applicable to the general population and reviewed the incidence and risk factors for secondary cancers after HCT. A consensus approach was used to establish recommendations for individual secondary cancers. The most common sites include oral cavity, skin, breast and thyroid. Risks of cancers are increased after HCT compared with the general population in skin, thyroid, oral cavity, esophagus, liver, nervous system, bone and connective tissues. Myeloablative TBI, young age at HCT, chronic GVHD and prolonged immunosuppressive treatment beyond 24 months were well-documented risk factors for many types of secondary cancers. All HCT recipients should be advised of the risks of secondary cancers annually and encouraged to undergo recommended screening based on their predisposition. Here we propose guidelines to help clinicians in providing screening and preventive care for secondary cancers among HCT recipients.

Peripheral T-cell lymphomas in a large US multicenter cohort: prognostication in the modern era including impact of frontline therapy.

BACKGROUND: Optimal frontline therapy for peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) in the modern era remains unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes among 341 newly diagnosed PTCL patients from 2000 to 2011. Outcome was compared with a matched cohort of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients, and prognostic factors were assessed using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: PTCL subtypes included PTCL, not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS) (31%), anaplastic large T-cell lymphoma (ALCL) (26%), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (23%), NK/T-cell lymphoma (7%), acute T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (6%), and other (7%). Median age was 62 years (range 18-95 years), and 74% had stage III-IV disease. Twenty-three (7%) patients received only palliative care whereas 318 received chemotherapy: CHOP-like regimens (70%), hyperCVAD/MA (6%), or other (18%). Thirty-three patients (10%) underwent stem-cell transplantation (SCT) in first remission. The overall response rate was 73% (61% complete); 24% had primary refractory disease. With 39-month median follow-up, 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 32% and 52%. PFS and OS for PTCL patients were significantly inferior to matched patients with DLBCL. On multivariate analysis, stage I-II disease was the only significant pretreatment prognostic factor [PFS: hazard ratio (HR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.85, P = 0.007; OS: HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22-0.78, P = 0.006]. ALK positivity in ALCL was prognostic on univariate analysis, but lost significance on multivariate analysis. The most dominant prognostic factor was response to initial therapy (complete response versus other), including adjustment for stage and SCT [PFS: HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.14-0.28, P < 0.0001; OS: HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.17-0.40, P < 0.0001]. No overall survival difference was observed based on choice of upfront regimen or SCT in first remission. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis identifies early-stage disease and initial treatment response as dominant prognostic factors in PTCL. No clear benefit was observed for patients undergoing consolidative SCT. Novel therapeutic approaches for PTCL are critically needed.