Loading clinical trials...
Loading clinical trials...
A Multi-Center, Phase III, Randomized Trial of RIC and Transplantation of (dUCB) Versus HLA-Haplo Related Bone Marrow for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies.(BMT CTN #1101)
Hematopoietic cell transplants (HCT)are one treatment option for people with leukemia or lymphoma. Family members,unrelated donors or banked umbilical cordblood units with similar tissue type can be used for HCT. This study will compare the effectiveness of two new types of bone marrow transplants in people with leukemia or lymphoma: one that uses bone marrow donated from family members with only partially matched bone marrow; and, one that uses two partially matched cord blood units.
Reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) blood or marrow transplantation (BMT) has allowed older and less clinically fit patients to receive potentially curative treatment with allogeneic HCT for high risk or advanced hematological malignancies. Patients lacking an HLA-matched sibling may receive a graft from a suitably HLA-matched unrelated donor. However, up to a third of patients will not have an HLA-matched sibling or a suitably matched adult unrelated donor (i.e., no more than a mismatch at a single locus). Even when a suitably matched unrelated donor is identified, data from the National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP) indicate that a median of four months is required to complete searches that result in transplantation; thus, some number of patients succumb to their disease while awaiting identification and evaluation of a suitably matched adult unrelated donor. Single or dual center studies have shown that partially HLA-mismatched related bone marrow (haplo-BM) and unrelated double umbilical cord blood (dUCB) are valuable sources of donor cells for RIC HCT, thus extending this treatment modality to patients who lack other donors. In order to study the reproducibility, and thus, the wider applicability of these two alternative donor strategies, The Blood and Marrow Transplantation Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) conducted two parallel multicenter prospective Phase II clinical trials. These two studies evaluated the safety and efficacy of related haplo-BM (BMT CTN 0603) and dUCB (BMT CTN 0604) transplantation after RIC. Both of these alternative donor approaches produced early results similar to that reported with unrelated donor, and even HLA-matched sibling, HCT. These data demonstrate not only the efficacy of both of these approaches, but also that both can be safely exported from the single center setting. Both haplo-BM and dUCB grafts can be obtained rapidly for greater than 90% of patients lacking an HLA-matched donor. This study will test the hypothesis that progression free survival at two years after RIC haplo-BM transplantation is similar to the progression free survival after RIC dUCB transplantation.
Age
18 - 70 years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
No
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
Arizona Cancer Center
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
City of Hope National Medical Center
Duarte, California, United States
University of California at Los Angeles
Los Angeles, California, United States
Stanford Hospital and Clinics
Stanford, California, United States
University of Florida College of Medicine (Shands)
Gainesville, Florida, United States
Florida Hospital Cancer Institute
Orlando, Florida, United States
Emory University
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
BMT Program at Northside Hospital
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
University of Kansas Hospital
Kansas City, Kansas, United States
Start Date
June 1, 2012
Primary Completion Date
September 11, 2020
Completion Date
September 11, 2020
Last Updated
December 1, 2021
368
ACTUAL participants
Haploidentical Bone Marrow Transplant
BIOLOGICAL
Double Umbilical Cord Blood Transplant
BIOLOGICAL
Lead Sponsor
Medical College of Wisconsin
Collaborators
NCT06859424
NCT06481735
Data Source & Attribution
This clinical trial information is sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov, a service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health.
Modifications: This data has been reformatted for display purposes. Eligibility criteria have been parsed into inclusion/exclusion sections. Location data has been geocoded to enable distance-based search. For the authoritative and most current information, please visit ClinicalTrials.gov.
Neither the United States Government nor Clareo Health make any warranties regarding the data. Check ClinicalTrials.gov frequently for updates.
View ClinicalTrials.gov Terms and Conditions