Liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome®; LAmB) is a unique lipid formulation of amphotericin B. LAmB is a standard of care for a wide range of medically important opportunistic fungal pathogens. LAmB has a significantly improved toxicity profile compared with conventional amphotericin B deoxycholate (DAmB). Despite nearly 20 years of clinical use, the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of this agent, which differ considerably from DAmB, remain relatively poorly understood and underutilized in the clinical setting.The molecular pharmacology, preclinical and clinical pharmacokinetics, and clinical experience with LAmB for the most commonly encountered fungal pathogens are reviewed. In vitro, experimental animal models and human clinical trial data are summarized, and novel routes of administration and dosing schedules are discussed.LAmB is a formulation that results in reduced toxicity as compared with DAmB while retaining the antifungal effect of the active agent. Its long terminal half-life and retention in tissues suggest that single or intermittent dosing regimens are feasible, and these should be actively investigated in both preclinical models and in clinical trials. Significant gaps remain in knowledge of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in special populations such as neonates and children, pregnant women and obese patients.

Relapse remains the most common cause of treatment failure for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who undergo allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT), and carries a grave prognosis. Multiple studies have identified the presence of measurable residual disease (MRD) assessed by flow cytometry before alloSCT as a strong predictor of relapse, but it is not clear how these findings apply to patients who test positive in molecular MRD assays, which have far greater sensitivity. We analyzed pretransplant blood and bone marrow samples by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction in 107 patients with NPM1-mutant AML enrolled in the UK National Cancer Research Institute AML17 study. After a median follow-up of 4.9 years, patients with negative, low (<200 copies per 105ABL in the peripheral blood and <1000 copies in the bone marrow aspirate), and high levels of MRD had an estimated 2-year overall survival (2y-OS) of 83%, 63%, and 13%, respectively (P < .0001). Focusing on patients with low-level MRD before alloSCT, those with FLT3 internal tandem duplications(ITDs) had significantly poorer outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 6.14; P = .01). Combining these variables was highly prognostic, dividing patients into 2 groups with 2y-OS of 17% and 82% (HR, 13.2; P < .0001). T-depletion was associated with significantly reduced survival both in the entire cohort (2y-OS, 56% vs 96%; HR, 3.24; P = .0005) and in MRD-positive patients (2y-OS, 34% vs 100%; HR, 3.78; P = .003), but there was no significant effect of either conditioning regimen or donor source on outcome. Registered at ISRCTN (http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN55675535).

PURPOSE Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens have extended the curative potential of allogeneic stem-cell transplantation to older adults with high-risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplasia (MDS) but are associated with a high risk of disease relapse. Strategies to reduce recurrence are urgently required. Registry data have demonstrated improved outcomes using a sequential transplant regimen, fludarabine/amsacrine/cytarabine-busulphan (FLAMSA-Bu), but the impact of this intensified conditioning regimen has not been studied in randomized trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two hundred forty-four patients (median age, 59 years) with high-risk AML (n = 164) or MDS (n = 80) were randomly assigned 1:1 to a fludarabine-based RIC regimen or FLAMSA-Bu. Pretransplant measurable residual disease (MRD) was monitored by flow cytometry (MFC-MRD) and correlated with outcome. RESULTS There was no difference in 2-year overall survival (hazard ratio 1.05 [85% CI, 0.80 to 1.38] P = .81) or cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) (hazard ratio 0.94 [95%CI, 0.60 to 1.46] P = .81) between the control and FLAMSA-Bu arms. Detectable pretransplant MFC-MRD was associated with an increased CIR (2-year CIR 41.0% v 20.0%, P = .01) in the overall trial cohort with a comparable prognostic impact when measured by an unsupervised analysis approach. There was no evidence of interaction between MRD status and conditioning regimen intensity for relapse or survival. Acquisition of full donor T-cell chimerism at 3 months abrogated the adverse impact of pretransplant MRD on CIR and overall survival. CONCLUSION The intensified RIC conditioning regimen, FLAMSA-Bu, did not improve outcomes in adults transplanted for high-risk AML or MDS regardless of pretransplant MRD status. Our data instead support the exploration of interventions with the ability to accelerate acquisition of full donor T-cell chimerism as a tractable strategy to improve outcomes in patients allografted for AML.

This study (PHANTASTIC) compares first-line plerixafor with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in 98 myeloma and lymphoma patients with 151 historic controls mobilised by conventional chemotherapy+G-CSF. Eleven patients developed mild transient symptoms possibly related to plerixafor. No serious adverse events were seen. Seventy (71%) plerixafor-mobilised patients achieved both ⩾4 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg in ⩽2 aphereses and no neutropenia (<1.0 × 109/l). This is significantly >48 (32%) of 151 historical chemotherapy+G-CSF-mobilised control patients achieving this end point (P<0.001). Ninety-six (98%) plerixafor-mobilised patients achieved ⩾2 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg within one harvest round compared with 114 (75%) of controls (P=0.001). Engraftment times and 12-month outcome were comparable in both groups. Prior treatment was summarised by two scoring systems. Controls mobilising either >2.0 or >4.0 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg have significantly lower scores than mobilisation failures (P=0.002), but this relationship was not seen for plerixafor-mobilised patients. Plerixafor is a more effective and less toxic mobilising agent than conventional chemotherapy (especially in heavily pretreated patients), with comparable subsequent outcome, and merits consideration as the first-line standard of care for stem cell mobilisation.

No abstract