Reduced intensity conditioning is effective for hematopoietic SCT in dyskeratosis congenita-related BM failure

BM failure (BMF) is a major and frequent complication of dyskeratosis congenita (DKC). Allogeneic hematopoietic SCT (allo-HSCT) represents the only curative treatment for BMF associated with this condition. Transplant-related morbidity/mortality is common especially after myeloablative conditioning regimens. Herein, we report nine cases of patients with DKC who received an allo-SCT at five different member centers within the Eastern Mediterranean Blood and Marrow Transplantation Registry. Between October 1992 and February 2011, nine DKC patients (male, 7 and female, 2), with a median age at transplantation of 19.1 (4.9–31.1) years, underwent an allo-HSCT from HLA-matched, morphologically normal-related donors (100%). Preparative regimens varied according to different centers, but was reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) in eight patients. Graft source was unstimulated BM in five cases (56%) and G-CSF-mobilized PBSCs in four (44%) cases. The median stem cell dose was 6.79 (2.06–12.4) × 106 cells/kg body weight. GVHD prophylaxis consisted of CsA in all nine cases; MTX or mycophenolate mofetil were added in five (56%) and two (22%) cases, respectively. Anti-thymocyte globulin was administered at various doses and scheduled in four (44%) cases. Median time-to-neutrophil engraftment was 21 (17–27) days. In one case, late graft failure was noted at 10.4 months post allo-HSCT. Only one patient developed grade II acute GVHD (11%). Extensive chronic GVHD was reported in one case, whereas limited chronic GVHD occurred in another four cases. At a median follow-up of 61 (0.8–212) months, seven (78%) patients were still alive and transfusion independent. One patient died of metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma and graft failure was the cause of death in another patient. This study suggests that RIC preparative regimens are successful in inducing hematopoietic cell engraftment in patients with BMF from DKC. Owing to the limited sample size, the use of registry data and heterogeneity of preparative as well as GVHD prophylaxis regimens reported in this series, we are unable to recommend a particular regimen to be considered as the standard for patients with this disease.