An observational study in Severe Aplastic Anemia, sponsored by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 2 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-03-16.
Sponsored by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) · Observational
Background:
Severe aplastic anemia (SAA) is a form of bone marrow failure. It usually results from a
cytotoxic T cell attack on the marrow stem cell. Two treatments can be used for most people with SAA. One is allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). The other is immunosuppressive treatment (IST). For people who are treated with IST, relapse can occur. If this happens, they can have HSCT or be re-treated with IST. The two most common IST regimes used for relapsed SAA are rabbit ATG (rATG) and alemtuzumab. Both rATG and alemtuzumab have similar response rates and survival rates. There is not much long-term data on people who need repeat IST treatment due to relapse. Researchers want to look at data from past studies to learn more.
Objective:
To compare the data of relapsed SAA patients between those who received alemtuzumab versus rATG for repeat IST treatment.
Eligibility:
Adults and children with SAA who were enrolled on NHLBI protocol 12-H-0150, 06-H-0034, 05-H-0242, 03-H-0249, 03-H-0193, 00-H-0032, or 90-H-0146
Design:
This study uses data from past studies. The participants in those studies have allowed their data to be used in future research.
Researchers will review participants medical records. They will collect clinical data, such as notes, test results, and imaging scans. They will also collect the research data gathered as part of the original study.
Researchers will enter the data into an in-house database. It is password protected. All data will be kept in secure network drives or in secure sites.
Other studies may be added in the future....
Severe aplastic anemia (SAA) is a form of bone marrow failure and in most cases is the result of a cytotoxic T cell attack on the marrow stem cell. It is effectively treated in most patients with either immunosuppressive treatment (IST) or upfront allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). However, in patients who are treated with IST, relapse remains an issue with a rate of 30-40%. Once relapsed, patients can be either re-treated with IST or undergo HSCT. The two most common IST regimes used for relapsed SAA are rabbit ATG (rATG) and alemtuzumab. Both rATG and alemtuzumab have been shown to have a response rate of approximately 60% in relapsed patients with similar overall survival rates of 83-85%. Previous predictors of relapse include time from diagnosis to IST, and early response to IST. Few long-term data exist on patients requiring repeat IST treatment due to relapse.
1,733 studies on the registry are indexed under Anemia; 246 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 173 is below the median of 200 across 326 observational studies indexed under Anemia.
Browse Anemia studies →National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) is the lead sponsor of 1,117 studies on the registry; 71 are open to participants now.
Of its 57 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 49 (86%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Relapsed SAA Subjects who had a repeat IST
Patients who opted out of future use of data on their prior studies will be excluded from this study.
Patients with Severe Aplastic Anemia who Relapsed after Immunosuppressive Therapy
Assessment of long-term outcomes of relapsed patients who received repeat IST
Characteristics and outcomes of relapsed SAA patients between those who received alemtuzumab versus rATG for repeat IST
Time frame: Between the Period of 1990 to 2020
Clinical predictors for the development of relapse
Clinical predictors for the development of relapse such as age, gender, baseline laboratory values, time from diagnosis to initial treatment, and initial treatment received.
Time frame: Between the Period of 1990 to 2020
Rates of clonal evolution between relapsed patients depending on type of IST received and number of IST rounds required
Compare rates of clonal evolution between relapsed patients depending on type of IST received and number of IST rounds required.
Time frame: Between the Period of 1990 to 2020
This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)