The optimal treatments for relapsed acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) remain equivocal. We conducted a phase 2 study to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of a sequential treatment consisting of induction and consolidation with arsenic trioxide (ATO), peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) harvest after high-dose cytarabine chemotherapy, and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Between 2005 and 2009, 35 patients (26 with hematologic and 9 with molecular relapse) were enrolled. Induction therapy resulted in complete remission in 81% of those with hematologic relapse, and most patients became negative for PML-RARα after the first ATO consolidation course, but 4 remained positive. Administration of the second ATO consolidation course further decreased the transcript levels in 3 patients. In total, 25 patients proceeded to PBSC harvest, all of whom successfully achieved the target CD34+ cell doses, and 23 underwent autologous HCT with PML-RARα–negative PBSC graft. Posttransplant relapse occurred in 3 patients, and there was no transplant-related mortality. With a median follow-up of 4.9 years, the 5-year event-free and overall survival rates were 65% and 77%, respectively. These findings demonstrate the outstanding efficacy and feasibility of the sequential treatment featuring ATO and autologous HCT for relapsed APL. This study was registered at http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/ as #C000000302. Key Points We conducted a phase 2 study of ATO followed by autologous HCT for relapsed APL. This sequential treatment is effective and feasible.

This study aimed at determining how cytogenetic risk status affects outcomes for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) after undergoing various types of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Of 7812 patients eligible for analysis, cytogenetic risk was classified as favorable for 1088, intermediate for 5025, and poor for 1699. Overall, multivariate analysis showed significant intergroup differences in terms of relapse and survival, with the difference between poor- and intermediate-risk groups being greater than that between favorable- and intermediate-risk groups. Non-relapse mortality was identical for the three groups. Significant effects of cytogenetic risk status on survival were documented irrespective of donor type (related, unrelated, and umbilical cord blood), disease status at the time of transplantation (first or second complete remission, and more advanced disease status), and conditioning intensity (myeloablative and reduced-intensity). Our findings demonstrate robust and constant effects of cytogenetic risk status on survival after allogeneic HCT for patients with AML.

Purpose: The introduction of all-trans-retinoic acid (ATRA) has significantly improved outcomes for acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL), although a subset of patients still suffer relapse. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of maintenance therapy with the synthetic retinoid tamibarotene in APL. Patients and Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed APL in molecular remission at the end of consolidation therapy were randomly assigned to receive ATRA or tamibarotene, both orally, for 14 days every 3 months for up to 2 years. Results: A total of 347 patients were enrolled. Of the 344 eligible patients, 319 (93%) achieved complete remission. After completing three courses of consolidation therapy, 269 patients underwent maintenance random assignment. The relapse-free survival (RFS) rate at 4 years was 84% for the ATRA arm and 91% for the tamibarotene arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.26 to 1.13). When the analysis was restricted to 52 high-risk patients with an initial WBC count ≥ 10.0 × 10⁹/L, the intergroup difference was statistically significant, with 4-year RFS rates of 58% for the ATRA arm and 87% for the tamibarotene arm (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.95). For patients with non–high-risk disease, the HR was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.32 to 2.01). The test for interaction between treatment effects and these subgroups resulted in P = .075. Both treatments were generally well tolerated. Conclusion: In this trial, no difference was detected between ATRA and tamibarotene for maintenance therapy. In an exploratory analysis, there was a suggestion of improved efficacy of tamibarotene in high-risk patients, but this requires further study.