Comparative Study of Mycophenolate Mofetil and Methotrexate in Graft-Versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis in Adult Recipients of Related and Unrelated Allo-HSCT

• Main Authors: IS Moiseev, YuA Tarakanova, AL Alyanskii, EV Babenko, MM Kanunnikov, VA Dubkova, EV Morozova, EI Darskaya, OA Slesarchuk, AD Kulagin, SN Bondarenko, BV Afanas’ev
• Format: Article
• Language: Russian
• Published: Practical Medicine Publishing House 2018-12-01
• Series: Kliničeskaâ onkogematologiâ
• Subjects: allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; graft-versus-host disease; prophylaxis; methotrexate; mycophenolate mofetil
• Online Access: http://bloodjournal.ru/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/6-1.pdf

Background. Although the use of methotrexate (MTX) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) for prophylaxis of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) was compared in a large number of studies, the published results are contradictory. This fact provides ground for the present retrospective single-center trial comparing these two approaches in GVHD prophylaxis. Materials & Methods. The present study included 294 allo-HSC recipients with MTX prophylaxis and 172 allo-HSC recipients with MMF prophylaxis. 36 % of patients underwent matched related donor transplantation, and 64 % of patients received matched unrelated donor transplantation. Results. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that probability of acute grade 2–4 GVHD is 36 % vs. 39 % (hazard ratio [HR] 1.297; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.931–1.795; p = 0.122), grade 3–4 GVHD was 21 % vs. 25 % (HR 1.472; 95% CI 0.951–2.256; p = 0.05), and probability of chronic GVHD was 52 % vs. 55 % (HR 0.978; 95% CI 0.951–1.406; p = 0.91). In the MTX and MMF groups there were no significant differences in transplantation mortality (HR 1.173; 95% CI 0.797–1.708; p = 0.43), relapse incidence (HR 1.034; 95% CI 0.743–1.428; p = 0.84), overall survival (HR 1.087; 95% CI 0.825–1.433; p = 0.55), event-free survival (HR 1.108; 95% CI 0.854–1.437; p = 0.43), disease and GVHD free survival (HR 1.065; 95% CI 0.845–1.343; p = 0.59). Engraftment occurred earlier when MMF was used (p = 0.035). Administration of MMF instead of MTX was associated with lower probability of toxic grade 3–4 hepatitis (7 % vs. 31 %; p < 0.0001) and grade 3–4 mucositis (23 % vs. 45 %; p = 0.0002). Conclusion. The efficacy of GVHD prophylaxis using MMF is comparable with that of MTX, but MMF is associated with a better safety profile due to reduced incidence of severe liver toxicity and mucositis.