ConductScience.org, home

Trial · NCT00520130

Chemotherapy and Unrelated Donor Stem Cell Transplantation for Patients With Cancers of the Blood and Immune System

NCT00520130, Phase 1, Phase 2, Completed, National Cancer Institute (NCI); results first posted 2017-08-24

3 sourcestrials-2026-11-12-0.5.0

Download JSON
Cite this record

ConductScience Library. Chemotherapy and Unrelated Donor Stem Cell Transplantation for Patients With Cancers of the Blood and Immune System. Trials, record NCT00520130. Release trials-2026-11-12-0.5.0, 12 Nov 2026. https://conductscience.org/library/trials/NCT00520130

On this page

Trial

As registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, in the graph's capture of the registry.

Title
Chemotherapy and Unrelated Donor Stem Cell Transplantation for Patients With Cancers of the Blood and Immune System
NCT number
NCT00520130
Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 1, Phase 2
Enrollment
92 participants, actual
Lead sponsor
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Conditions
Myelodysplastic Syndrome, Hodgkin's Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin's Disease, Acute Leukemia, Multiple Myeloma
Interventions
Rituximab, Cyclosporine, Allogenic stem cell transplant (ASCT), Conditioning Chemotherapy, TMS, FLAG, EPOCH-F, Alemtuzumab
First posted
2007-08-23
Last updated
2019-03-05
Results first posted
2017-08-24

Source ClinicalTrials.gov

Registered outcomes18

Each outcome the trial registered, primary first, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.

ListOutcomeTime frameDescription
PrimaryPercentage of Participants With Grade II-IV Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD)6 months
Acute GVHD is assessed by the 1994 Consensus Conference on Acute GVHD Grading criteria. See Przepiorka D, Weisdorf D, Martin P, et al. 1994 Consensus Conference on Acute GVHD Grading. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1995; 15:825-8., for grading criteria.
PrimaryPercentage of Participants With Chronic Graft Versus Host Disease (cGVHD)2 years post transplant
Chronic GVHD is assessed by the 2005 Chronic GVHD Consensus Project. First the individual organ scoring is done, and then based on that the Global score is determined (mild-moderate-severe). See Citation: Filipovich AH, Weisdorf D, Pavletic S, et al. National Institutes of Health consensus development project on criteria for clinical trials in chronic graft-versus-host disease: I. Diagnosis and staging working group report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2005; 11:945-56., for grading criteria.
PrimaryRecovery of Naïve Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) T CellsRecipient recovery at 6, 12 and 24 months post transplantThe percentage of C-C motif chemokine receptor 7 (CCR7)+CD45RA+ naïve T cells within the CD4 T cell populations was determined by flow cytometry.
PrimaryRecovery of Naïve Cluster of Differentiation 8 (CD8) T CellsRecipient recovery at 6, 12 and 24 months post transplantThe percentage of CCR7+CD45RA+ naïve T cells within the CD4 and CD8 T cell populations was determined by flow cytometry.
PrimaryChanges in Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) T Cell Receptor Vbeta RepertoireDonor at time of collection and recipient at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months post transplant
Ribonucleic acid (RNA) was extracted from sorted CD4 and cluster of differentiation 8 (CD8) T cells and analyzed for Vbeta repertoire by nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis using Vbeta family specific primers and a labeled constant region primer (spectratyping). The receptor repertoire diversity was calculated from spectratyping data by creating a normal standard for repertoire diversity from healthy normal controls and assessing the divergence of individual patient's T cell receptor repertoire from these standard normal donor values. In this Vbeta repertoire divergence index, lower numbers are consistent with a more normal highly diverse repertoire, and high numbers represent a highly skewed, oligoclonal repertoire. The assay is described in Memon SA et al, J Immunol Methods, 2012, 375: 84-92. The repertoire diversity of the CD4 and CD8 T cells of the donor infusion is shown for comparison.
PrimaryChanges in CD8 T Cell Receptor Vbeta RepertoireDonor at time of collection and recipient at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months post transplant
Ribonucleic acid (RNA) was extracted from sorted CD4 and cluster of differentiation 8 (CD8) T cells and analyzed for Vbeta repertoire by nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis using Vbeta family specific primers and a labeled constant region primer (spectratyping). The receptor repertoire diversity was calculated from spectratyping data by creating a normal standard for repertoire diversity from healthy normal controls and assessing the divergence of individual patient's T cell receptor repertoire from these standard normal donor values. In this Vbeta repertoire divergence index, lower numbers are consistent with a more normal highly diverse repertoire, and high numbers represent a highly skewed, oligoclonal repertoire. The assay is described in Memon SA et al, J Immunol Methods, 2012, 375: 84-92. The repertoire diversity of the CD4 and CD8 T cells of the donor infusion is shown for comparison.
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Grade III-IV Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD)6 months
Acute GVHD is assessed by the 1994 Consensus Conference on acute GVHD Grading criteria. See Przepiorka D, Weisdorf D, Martin P, et al. 1994 Consensus Conference on Acute GVHD Grading. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1995; 15:825-8., for grading criteria.
SecondaryToxicities103 months and 22 daysHere are the number of participants with adverse events. For a detailed list of adverse events, see the adverse event module.
SecondaryDays to Engraftment of Neutrophils2 yearsDays to engraftment is defined as neutrophil recovery: designated by the first of 3 consecutive days with an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) above 500/mm(3).
SecondaryDays to Engraftment of Platelets2 yearsPlatelet recovery: designated by the first of 7 days where the platelet count remains above 20,000/mm(3) without transfusion support

Outcomes18

Each outcome the trial posted results for, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.

TypeOutcomeTime framePopulationUnitsMeasured as
PRIMARYPercentage of Participants With Grade II-IV Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD)6 months2 of 44 patients who completed the AC arm were transplanted after our cutoff for data analysis and are not included.percentage of participantsNUMBER
PRIMARYPercentage of Participants With Chronic Graft Versus Host Disease (cGVHD)2 years post transplant2 of 44 patients who completed the AC arm were transplanted after our cutoff for data analysis and are not included.percentage of participantsNUMBER
PRIMARYRecovery of Naïve Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) T CellsRecipient recovery at 6, 12 and 24 months post transplantA few measurements were missed, one patient was not evaluable for technical reasons and removed from the analysis, but most of the decline was due to patients that had gone off study.% of naive (CCR7+CD45RA+) CD4 CellsMEDIAN
PRIMARYRecovery of Naïve Cluster of Differentiation 8 (CD8) T CellsRecipient recovery at 6, 12 and 24 months post transplantA few measurements were missed, one patient was not evaluable for technical reasons and removed from the analysis, but most of the decline was due to patients that had gone off study.% of naive (CCR7+CD45RA+) CD8 CellsMEDIAN
PRIMARYChanges in Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) T Cell Receptor Vbeta RepertoireDonor at time of collection and recipient at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months post transplant
The original intention was to perform these assays on the first 10 pts within each arm. One pt died within the first mo., others died within the 1st yr. Not all donors gave consent for research analyses to be done on their cells, hence cells from those donors were not available.
Divergence indexMEDIAN
PRIMARYChanges in CD8 T Cell Receptor Vbeta RepertoireDonor at time of collection and recipient at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months post transplant
The original intention was to perform these assays on the first 10 pts within each arm. One pt died within the first mo., others died within the 1st yr. Not all donors gave consent for research analyses to be done on their cells, hence cells from those donors were not available.
Divergence indexMEDIAN
SECONDARYPercentage of Participants With Grade III-IV Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD)6 months2 of 44 patients who completed the AC arm were transplanted after our cutoff for data analysis and are not included.percentage of participantsNUMBER
SECONDARYToxicities103 months and 22 daysparticipantsNUMBER
SECONDARYDays to Engraftment of Neutrophils2 yearsOne myeloma patient had graft failure in the AC Arm. 2 of 44 patients who completed the AC arm were transplanted after our cutoff for data analysis and are not included.Days to neutrophil engraftmentMEDIAN
SECONDARYDays to Engraftment of Platelets2 years2 of 44 patients who completed the AC arm were transplanted after our cutoff for data analysis and are not included.DaysMEDIAN

Results by group90

Each measurement the trial posted, group by group, in the words and numbers it posted.

OutcomeGroupCategoryValueSpreadUnits
Percentage of Participants With Grade II-IV Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD)A - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm4295% Confidence Interval 26 to 57percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Grade II-IV Acute Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD)B - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm3895% Confidence Interval 23 to 53percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Chronic Graft Versus Host Disease (cGVHD)A - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) ArmModerate or Severe cGVHD5095% Confidence Interval 32 to 65percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Chronic Graft Versus Host Disease (cGVHD)B - Cyclosporine (AC) ArmModerate or Severe cGVHD1295% Confidence Interval 4 to 25percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Chronic Graft Versus Host Disease (cGVHD)A - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) ArmSevere cGVHD2895% Confidence Interval 14 to 43percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Chronic Graft Versus Host Disease (cGVHD)B - Cyclosporine (AC) ArmSevere cGVHD595% Confidence Interval 1 to 15percentage of participants
Recovery of Naïve Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) T CellsA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm6 mo (TMS=28; AC= 28)24Full Range 2 to 65% of naive (CCR7+CD45RA+) CD4 Cells
Recovery of Naïve Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) T CellsB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm6 mo (TMS=28; AC= 28)1Full Range 0 to 22% of naive (CCR7+CD45RA+) CD4 Cells
Recovery of Naïve Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) T CellsA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm12 mo (TMS=25; AC= 21)22Full Range 5 to 48% of naive (CCR7+CD45RA+) CD4 Cells
Recovery of Naïve Cluster of Differentiation 4 (CD4) T CellsB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm12 mo (TMS=25; AC= 21)7Full Range 0 to 42% of naive (CCR7+CD45RA+) CD4 Cells

Participant flow6

How many started, completed or left each group, period by period.

PeriodMilestoneGroupParticipantsUnits counted
Overall StudySTARTEDA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm44
Overall StudySTARTEDB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm45
Overall StudyCOMPLETEDA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm39
Overall StudyCOMPLETEDB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm44
Overall StudyNOT COMPLETEDA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm5
Overall StudyNOT COMPLETEDB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm1

Adverse events710

Each adverse event the trial posted, group by group: the participants affected out of those at risk.

TypeEventOrgan systemGroupAffectedAt riskEvents
otherALT, SGPT (serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase)Metabolism and nutrition disordersA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm284475
otherALT, SGPT (serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase)Metabolism and nutrition disordersB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm174545
otherAST, SGOT(serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase)Metabolism and nutrition disordersA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm264473
otherAST, SGOT(serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase)Metabolism and nutrition disordersB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm234550
otherAcidosis (metabolic or respiratory)Metabolism and nutrition disordersA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm0440
otherAcidosis (metabolic or respiratory)Metabolism and nutrition disordersB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm1451
otherAdrenal insufficiencyEndocrine disordersA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm1441
otherAdrenal insufficiencyEndocrine disordersB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm1451
otherAdult Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disordersA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm1441
otherAdult Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disordersB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm1451

Adverse event totals6

The totals the trial posted for each group.

TotalGroupAffectedAt risk
Total, all-cause mortalityA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm844
Total, all-cause mortalityB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm1945
Total, other adverse eventsA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm4344
Total, other adverse eventsB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm4245
Total, serious adverse eventsA - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm3644
Total, serious adverse eventsB - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm4145

Papers6

The papers the trial lists on ClinicalTrials.gov.

PMIDListed asSource
16503494BACKGROUNDPubMed
16980994BACKGROUNDPubMed
22289893BACKGROUNDPubMed
23689118BACKGROUNDPubMed
32785680DERIVEDPubMed
38669315DERIVEDPubMed

Grants0

The grants NIH RePORTER links to the trial, newest funded first: NIH's, and some of AHRQ's, CDC's, FDA's and VA's. Each shows its title, principal investigators, organization and funder in its newest year.

None in this release.

Trial comparisons4

Comparisons of the trial's two groups, calculated by ConductScience from the counts it posted.

ComparisonSource
A - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm vs B - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm: ToxicitiesTrial comparisons
A - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm vs B - Cyclosporine (C) Arm: Early Treatment Related MortalityTrial comparisons
A - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm vs B - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm: deaths from any causeTrial comparisons
A - Tacrolimus, Methotrexate, Sirolimus (TMS) Arm vs B - Cyclosporine (AC) Arm: serious adverse eventsTrial comparisons

Tests0

The ConductCognition tests this trial's registered outcomes name, as ScienceGraph matched them in trial-tests-2026-11-12-0.2.1.

None in this release.

Data dates

The day each source was copied for this release.

ClinicalTrials.gov
2026-11-12
ClinicalTrials.gov
Results, from AACT
2026-03-23
AACT
NIH grant links
2026-11-13
NIH RePORTER

Sources 3

  • ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
  • ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
  • NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain
Each source's terms
  • ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
  • ClinicalTrials.govnone stated
  • NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain (NIH RePORTER)

ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions.

For software

Read this trial from software.

The record and each of its lists are JSON, twenty rows a page. No key.

GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT00520130

GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT00520130/results?page=2