Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Br J Haematol. 2016 Mar 15;174(2):235–248. doi: 10.1111/bjh.14046

Table VI.

Studies reporting outcomes of allogeneic transplantation in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients who received a prior autograft.

Study N MA vs. RIC
(N)		 NRM PFS OS Factors predicting
better PFS or OS
Van Kampen et al (2011) 101 37 vs. 64 28%
(3-year)		 42%
(3-year)		 54%
(3-year)		 TIBAR>1-year, normal LDH,
peripheral blood
graft
Rigacci et al (2012) 165 49 vs. 116 28%
(not specified)		 31%
(5-year)		 39%
(5-year)		 Chemosensitive disease,
matched sibling donors
Kim et al (2014) 30 7 vs. 23 17%
(not specified)		 38%
(5-year)		 43%
(5-year)		 Chemosensitive disease,
good performance
status
Current analysis 503 127 vs. 376 31%
(5-year)		 29%
(5-year)		 34%
(5-year)		 KPS>80, chemosensitive
disease, RIC, TIBAA >1-year

MA=myeloablative conditioning; RIC=reduced intensity conditioning, NRM=non-relapse mortality, PFS=progression-free survival; OS=overall survival; LDH=lactate dehydrogenase; TIBAA=time-interval between autologous and allogeneic transplantation; TIBAR=time interval between autologous transplant and post-autograft relapse; KPS=Karnofsky performance score.