Background: CMML has a poor prognosis with a median overall survival of about 30 months and a 15-20% risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia. For high-risk patients the median survival is 9 months. The only curative therapy is allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). While several prognostic models have been proposed in CMML, their predictive value in allograft recipients is not well established. We report the outcome of allo-HSCT in 28 patients (pts) with CMML, and the relationship between five CMML prognostic scoring systems and post-transplant disease-free survival (DFS).

Methods: 28 pts with CMML underwent allo-HSCT at MSKCC between 1/2002 and 2/2014. Pt and transplant characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Of the 28 pts, 6 had progressed to CMML-2 and 7 to AML pre-transplant. Except for 3 pts, all received chemotherapy before cytoreduction to decrease disease burden and all patients had <20% blasts prior to conditioning. Five prognostic scoring systems were used to classify the patients into low and high risk: 2 MDS and 3 CMML-specific models. T-cell depleted pts (n = 16, 60%) received myeloablative conditioning (12 busulphan/ melphalan/ fludarabine/ rabbit ATG and 4 TBI-based) whereas 12 pts (40%) received unmodified grafts with varying conditioning intensity. The source of HSC was 23 PB, 2 BM, and 3 cord blood.

Results All pts had sustained donor engraftment. The cumulative incidences of day 100 grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and 1-year chronic GVHD were 18% (95%CI:3-32) and 17% (95%CI:1-33), respectively. The 1-year incidence of transplant-related mortality was 7% (95%CI:0-17) with the most common transplant-related cause of death being infection. Three pts relapsed for a 1-year incidence of 13% (95%CI:0-26). These patients died of their disease. With a median follow-up of survivors of 3.3 years (range 3 months-11.6 years), the 3-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of overall survival is 74% (95%CI: 51-88) and DFS is 71% (95%CI: 47-85). All pts classified as having high-risk disease had similar survival to low risk disease pts (Table 2).

Conclusion: This preliminary data suggests that allo-HSCT can achieve a high DFS in pts with CMML, even in the setting of high-risk disease. Thus, allo-HSCT should potentially be considered in all patients with CMML including pts who have a dismal prognosis based on current prognostic scoring systems.

Table 1.

Patient and transplant characteristics

CharacteristicsN=28
Age , years (range) 60 (12-69) 
Gender
Male
Female 
-
18 (64%)
10 (36%) 
BM Blasts at diagnosis (%)
<5
5-9
10-19 
-
13 (46%)
7 (25%)
8 (29%) 
Diagnosis karyotype risk group per Spanish Score
Good
Intermediate/Poor 
-
17 (60%)
11 (40%) 
WHO classification at diagnosis
CMML-1 ( <10 % BM blasts)
CMML-2 (10-20% BM blasts) 
-
20 (71%)
8 (29%) 
FAB classification at diagnosis
Myelodysplastic subtype (< 13000 WBC)
Myeloproliferative subtype (> 13000 WBC) 
-
14 (50%)
14 (50%) 
WHO status at progression (highest disease)
CMML -1
CMML -2
AML 
-
12 (43%)
9 (32%)
7 (25%) 
Pre-transplant therapy
No chemotherapy
Hypomethylating agent
AML type chemotherapy 
-
5 (18%)
10 (36%)
13 (46%) 
BM Blasts pre-transplant (%)
<5
5-9
10-19 
-
21 (75%)
4 (14%)
3 (11%) 
Transplant conditioning
Myeloablative
Reduced intensity 
-
22 (78%)
6 (22%) 
Donor
8/8 HLA Matched related donor
8/8 HLA Matched unrelated donors
HLA-mismatched unrelated donors
Cord blood 
-
13 (46%)
9 (32%)
3 (11%)
3 (11%) 
GVHD prophylaxis
T cell depletion
Calcineurin inhibitor 
-
16 (60%)
12 (40%) 
CharacteristicsN=28
Age , years (range) 60 (12-69) 
Gender
Male
Female 
-
18 (64%)
10 (36%) 
BM Blasts at diagnosis (%)
<5
5-9
10-19 
-
13 (46%)
7 (25%)
8 (29%) 
Diagnosis karyotype risk group per Spanish Score
Good
Intermediate/Poor 
-
17 (60%)
11 (40%) 
WHO classification at diagnosis
CMML-1 ( <10 % BM blasts)
CMML-2 (10-20% BM blasts) 
-
20 (71%)
8 (29%) 
FAB classification at diagnosis
Myelodysplastic subtype (< 13000 WBC)
Myeloproliferative subtype (> 13000 WBC) 
-
14 (50%)
14 (50%) 
WHO status at progression (highest disease)
CMML -1
CMML -2
AML 
-
12 (43%)
9 (32%)
7 (25%) 
Pre-transplant therapy
No chemotherapy
Hypomethylating agent
AML type chemotherapy 
-
5 (18%)
10 (36%)
13 (46%) 
BM Blasts pre-transplant (%)
<5
5-9
10-19 
-
21 (75%)
4 (14%)
3 (11%) 
Transplant conditioning
Myeloablative
Reduced intensity 
-
22 (78%)
6 (22%) 
Donor
8/8 HLA Matched related donor
8/8 HLA Matched unrelated donors
HLA-mismatched unrelated donors
Cord blood 
-
13 (46%)
9 (32%)
3 (11%)
3 (11%) 
GVHD prophylaxis
T cell depletion
Calcineurin inhibitor 
-
16 (60%)
12 (40%) 

Table 2:

DFS per risk level defined by different prognostic models *CMML- specific scoring systems

Prognostic ScoreN3 year DFS
IPSS-R
0-1
2-3 
-
11
17 
-
83%
63% 
MDASC
0-1
2-3 
-
21
-
71%
69% 
MDAPS *
0-1
2-3 
-
16
12 
-
68%
74% 
Mayo *
0-1
-
10
18 
-
56%
76% 
Spanish Score *
0-1
2-3 
-
20
-
68%
75% 
Prognostic ScoreN3 year DFS
IPSS-R
0-1
2-3 
-
11
17 
-
83%
63% 
MDASC
0-1
2-3 
-
21
-
71%
69% 
MDAPS *
0-1
2-3 
-
16
12 
-
68%
74% 
Mayo *
0-1
-
10
18 
-
56%
76% 
Spanish Score *
0-1
2-3 
-
20
-
68%
75% 

Disclosures

Boulad:Genzyme Sanofi: Trials partially funded by Genzyme Sanofi Other.

Author notes

*

Asterisk with author names denotes non-ASH members.

Sign in via your Institution