No Relapse of Calcineurin Inhibitor-Associated Thrombotic Microangiopathy after Discontinuation of Eculizumab

Neumann, Thomas; Plis, Andrzej; Weigel, Martin; Stracke, Sylvia; Friesecke, Sigrun; Stecher, Stephanie-Susanne; Schneidewind, Laila; Busemann, Christoph; Schmidt, Christian A.; Krüger, William

doi:10.1159/000481724

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, our report shows that ruxolitinib is not only an option in steroid-refractory GvHD; it can be used as a substitute for other drugs like CNI in aHUS after alloSCT or to spare steroids [ 15 ]. Since some authors postulate evidence for an effectivity against GvHD effect while the GvL-effect of the allogeneic graft seems to be preserved, it might be an interesting option in GvHD prophylaxis especially in high-risk patients [ 16 , 17 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ruxolitinib for Therapy of Graft-versus-Host Disease

Neumann

Schneidewind

Weigel

et al. 2019

BioMed Research International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. Steroid-resistant graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) is a major challenge after allogeneic stem cell transplantation and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. There is no therapeutic standard defined beyond calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) and steroids. Furthermore, some patients may have contraindications against CNI or high-dose steroids. Efficacy of ruxolitinib against GvHD has been described recently. Methods. Ruxolitinib was used for treatment of acute or chronic GvHD in eight patients. The patients either needed intensification of therapy or had contraindications against use of CNI or high-dose steroids. Results. Supplementation of therapy in acute GvHD with severe diarrhea with ruxolitinib was unsuccessful. All these patients died from acute GvHD. Introduction of ruxolitinib into therapy and relapse prophylaxis in other patients was successful in 4/4 cases (CR=3, PR=1). Indications for ruxolitinib were contraindications against CNI due to aHUS in two cases and the need for steroid sparing in two other cases. None of these patients suffered from diarrhea at the initiation of ruxolitinib. Conclusion. Ruxolitinib was effective for therapy of acute and chronic GvHD in higher lines in patients without severe diarrhea. Ruxolitinib could replace successfully CNI and high-dose steroids. Further investigations are necessary to define the position of ruxolitinib in GvHD-therapy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%