Journals / Annals of Medical Research / 2021 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 11

Efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib plus extracorporeal photopheresis in acute and chronic graft versus host disease: A single center experience

Pages
2065–2070
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The overall response rate of acute GVHD patients to ruxolitinib ECP combination therapy was 16.7% (complete response: 16.7%, partial response: 0%).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: There is no standard treatment for corticosteroid refractory acute and chronic graft versus host disease (GVHD).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results: A total of 11 cases, 6 of which were acute, were included in this retrospective, observational and single-center study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The overall response rate of acute GVHD patients to ruxolitinib ECP combination therapy was 16.7% (complete response: 16.7%, partial response: 0%).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: There is no standard treatment for corticosteroid refractory acute and chronic graft versus host disease (GVHD). Ruxolitinib and extracorporeal phopheresis (ECP) are promising treatment options in GVHD. In this study, we aimed to share our clinical experience in steroid refractory GVHD patients treated with ruxolitinib plus ECP. Materials and Methods: The data of patients receiving ruxolitinib plus ECP for corticosteroid refractory acute and chronic GVHD patients were analyzed retrospectively. Results: A total of 11 cases, 6 of which were acute, were included in this retrospective, observational and single-center study. Acute GVHD developed in the 6 patients after allogeneic HSCT (median onset of GVHD=27, between 20 and 60 days ). Chronic GVHD developed in the 5 patients after allogeneic HSCT (median onset of GVHD= 159 between 60 and 380 days. The overall response rate of acute GVHD patients to ruxolitinib ECP combination therapy was 16.7% (complete response: 16.7%, partial response: 0%). The overall response rate of chronic GVHD patients to combination therapy was 60% (complete response: 20%, partial response: 40%). As a result of combination therapy, thrombocytopenia occurred in 36% (4/11) of patients, neutropenia in 27% (3/11) of patients, and CMV reactivation in 9% (1/11) of patients. Conclusion: We observed a low rate of overall response to ruxolitinib plus ECP treatment in acute GVHD patients but a high rate in chronic GVHD patients. According to our trial, ruxolitinib ECP combination may be beneficial in GVHD, especially in chronic GVHD, but prospective trials comparing its efficacy with other agents are needed.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kaya, E., Bahcecioglu, O. F., Gok, S., Erkurt, M. A., Kuku, I., Sarici, A., Berber, I., Bicim, S., Tanriverdi, L. H., Ozgul, M. (2022). Efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib plus extracorporeal photopheresis in acute and chronic graft versus host disease: A single center experience. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 11, 2065–2070. https://ajindex.com/articles/446300

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Aladag E, Kelkitli E, Goker H. Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease: A Brief Review. Turk J Haematol 2020;37:1
  2. Jacobsohn DA, Kurland BF, Pidala J, et al. Correlation between NIH composite skin score, patient-reported skin score, and outcome: results from the Chronic GVHD Consortium. Blood 2012;120:2545-52
  3. Jacobsohn DA, Vogelsang GB. Acute graft versus host disease. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2007;2:35
  4. Arai S, Arora M, Wang T, et al. Increasing incidence of chronic graft-versus-host disease in allogeneic transplantation: a report from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2015;21:266-74
  5. Filipovich AH, Weisdorf D, Pavletic S, et al. National Institutes of Health consensus development project on criteria for clinical trials in chronic graft-versushost disease: I. Diagnosis and staging working group report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2005;11:945-56
  6. Saad A, de Lima M, Anand S, et al. Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 2020;18:599-634
  7. Penack O, Marchetti M, Ruutu T, et al. Prophylaxis and management of graft versus host disease after stemcell transplantation for haematological malignancies: updated consensus recommendations of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Lancet Haematol 2020;7:e157-e67
  8. Przepiorka D, Luo L, Subramaniam S, et al. FDA Approval Summary: Ruxolitinib for Treatment of Steroid-Refractory Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease. Oncologist 2020;25:e328
  9. Gómez VE, García-Gutiérrez V, Corral LL, et al. Ruxolitinib in refractory acute and chronic graftversus-host disease: a multicenter survey study. Bone Marrow Transplant 2020;55:641-8
  10. Zeiser R, Burchert A, Lengerke C, et al. Ruxolitinib in corticosteroid-refractory graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic stem cell transplantation: a multicenter survey. Leukemia 2015;29:2062-8
  11. Greinix HT, Worel N, Just U, Knobler R. Extracorporeal photopheresis in acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease. Transfus Apher Sci 2014;50:349-57
  12. Kaloyannidis P, Mallouri D. The role of the extracorporeal photopheresis in the management of the graft-versus-host disease. Transfus Apher Sci 2012;46:211-9
  13. Maas-Bauer K, Kiote-Schmidt C, Bertz H, et al. Ruxolitinib–ECP combination treatment for refractory severe chronic graft-versus-host disease. Bone Marrow Transplant 2020:1-8
  14. Modemann F, Ayuk F, Wolschke C, et al.