Sparing effect by montelukast treatment for chronic graft versus host disease: a pilot study

Reuven Or1, Benjamin Gesundheit, Igor Resnick

  • 1Department of Bone Marrow Transplantation, Cancer Immunotherapy & Immunobiology Research Center, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel. reuvenor@hadassah.org.il

Transplantation
|March 14, 2007
PubMed

Insights

Montelukast (Mk) shows promise in treating chronic graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) after stem cell transplantation. This safe, supplementary therapy improved symptoms in 79% of patients, offering a potential toxicity-sparing option for GvHD management.

Area of Science:

  • Hematology
  • Immunology
  • Pharmacology

Background:

  • Chronic graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) is a significant complication following allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT).
  • It is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in long-term SCT survivors.
  • Cysteinyl leukotrienes (cysLTs) and eosinophils are implicated in GvHD pathogenesis.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the efficacy and safety of montelukast (Mk) as an add-on therapy for chronic GvHD.
  • To assess the impact of Mk on organ-specific manifestations of GvHD.

Main Methods:

  • A prospective study involving 19 patients with refractory chronic GvHD.
  • Patients received oral montelukast (10 mg daily) in addition to standard immunosuppression for a mean of 10 months.
  • Organ-specific responses were assessed using NIH consensus criteria.

Main Results:

  • An overall response rate of 79% (15/19 patients) was observed with combined therapy.
  • Significant improvements were noted in skin (53%), liver (62%), and gastrointestinal (46%) GvHD.
  • Montelukast was beneficial in milder GvHD stages, allowing earlier reduction of other immunosuppressants.
  • No side effects or disease relapses were documented.

Conclusions:

  • Montelukast (Mk) appears to be a safe and effective supplementary treatment for chronic GvHD.
  • This preliminary study supports Mk's potential to spare toxicity associated with standard GvHD therapies.
  • Further clinical trials are needed to determine optimal dosing and its role in acute and chronic GvHD prophylaxis and treatment.
Abstract