Stem cell transplantation for mantle cell lymphoma: should it ever be used outside clinical trials?

The outlook for patients with mantle cell lymphoma is poor. The reported median survival in most published series is only 3 to 4 years, and even the most favorable prognostic groups have median survival rates of only 5 years, with no evidence of cure. The use of autologous and allogeneic stem cell t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBone marrow transplantation (Basingstoke) Vol. 28; no. 9; pp. 813 - 820
Main Author SWEETENHAM, J. W
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Basingstoke Nature Publishing Group 01.11.2001
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The outlook for patients with mantle cell lymphoma is poor. The reported median survival in most published series is only 3 to 4 years, and even the most favorable prognostic groups have median survival rates of only 5 years, with no evidence of cure. The use of autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation in this disease has increased dramatically in recent years. Despite encouraging reports from single centers and registries, the impact of stem cell transplantation on the outcome for mantle cell lymphoma is unclear. Optimal first-line regimens for mantle cell lymphoma have yet to be defined, and it is therefore difficult to place the role of first remission transplantation in an appropriate context. Prospective randomized trials have been difficult to design and conduct in the absence of a well-defined 'standard' treatment. The role of stem cell transplantation as a salvage strategy is also unknown, although available data suggest that it does not improve survival in heavily pre-treated patients. In the absence of clear evidence for a survival advantage for patients receiving stem cell transplants for mantle cell lymphoma, entry into clinical trials should be a priority.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Feature-3
ObjectType-Review-1
ISSN:0268-3369
1476-5365
DOI:10.1038/sj.bmt.1703255