Clinical trial NCT02458235
Conditions: Acute Myelogenous Leukemia Acute Lymphoid Leukemia Juvenile Myelomonocytic Leukemia Myelodysplastic Syndrome
Keywords: pediatric leukemia myelodysplastic syndrome azacitidine
Sponsor: University of California, San Francisco
Start date: 2015-06-02; Completion date: 2019-03-15
Enrollment: 17 participants; Allocation: NA; Intervention model: SINGLE_GROUP

Brief summary:
The goal of this study is to determine whether post-transplant consolidation with azacitidine combined with donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) is a safe and effective approach for the prevention of relapse in pediatric and young adult patients with hematologic malignancies who have undergone hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

Detailed description:
This is a phase II single-arm trial of azacitidine (IV or SC) in combination with escalating donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI). Patients will be enrolled on the study by day +28 +/- 7 post-transplant, prior to withdrawal of immunosuppression or administration of donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI). They will have donor chimerism and minimal residual disease (MRD) testing from peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM) on day +28 ± 7. Patients will be stratified according to risk categories (low, standard and high), defined by GVHD status, mixed versus full donor chimerism, and positive versus negative MRD results. Depending on risk assessment, immunosuppression will be tapered according to standard or fast schedules, and patients (with the exception of low-risk ALL patients) will receive one cycle of low-dose azacitidine (40mg/m2 IV/SC daily x 4 days). After tapering immunosuppression, chimerism will be repeated and patients will receive up to 6 additional cycles of low-dose azacitidine, depending on risk assessment. For patients who meet criteria for high risk of relapse, azacitidine will be combined with escalating doses of DLI for a maximum of 7 cycles in total. Risk and safety assessments, including routine laboratory parameters, donor chimerism, minimal residual disease, and GHVD activity will be assessed following each cycle. Chimerism and minimal residual disease testing will be repeated every cycle by peripheral blood (PB), and bone marrow (BM) will be tested every other cycle. Patients will be followed by laboratory monitoring and physician evaluation prior to each cycle, and will be followed for two years post-transplant to study toxicity and GVHD outcomes.

Arms: arm 1: Patients will be stratified according to risk categories (low, standard and high), defined by GVHD status, mixed versus full donor chimerism, and positive versus negative Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) results. Patients will receive up to 7 cycles of low-dose azacitidine (40mg/m2 IV/SC daily x 4 days) at 6 weekly intervals, except for low risk ALL patients who may not receive treatment after withdrawal of immunosuppression. Standard risk patients will receive an additional 6 cycles of azacitidine alone. High risk patients will receive an additional 6 cycles of azacitidine plus escalating DLI.
Interventions: intervention 1: azacitidine intervention 2: donor lymphocyte infusion
Intervention descriptions: intervention 1: 40mg/m2 IV/SC daily x 4 days, maximum of 7 cycles at 6 weekly intervals intervention 2: For patients with cells available for DLI who are in the high risk group and do not have graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), DLI will be adminstered on day 5 of each cycle.

Protocol documents:
Prot_SAP_001.pdf: 
Protocol Title:
A phase II study of risk-adapted donor lymphocyte infusion and azacitidine 
1
for the prevention of hematologic malignancy relapse following allogeneic stem cell transplantation
A phase II study of risk-adapted donor lymphocyte infusion and 
azacitidine for the prevention of hematologic malignancy relapse 
following allogeneic stem cell transplantation
Protocol Number: 140813
Version: 1.4
Version Date: 11/17/2016
Principal Investigator
Co-Investigator
Statistician
Clinical Research Coordinator
Revision History
Version 1.1: 12/18/2014
Version 1.2: 1/26/2015
Version 1.3: 10/14/2015   
Version 1.4: 11/17/2016
NCT# 02458235


Protocol Signature Page
Protocol No.:  140813     
Version Date: 11/17/2016
1. I agree to follow this protocol version as approved by the UCSF Protocol Review Committee (PRC), 
Committee on Human Research (CHR), and Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC). 
2. I will conduct the study in accordance with applicable CHR requirements, Federal regulations, and state 
and local laws to maintain the protection of the rights and welfare of study participants. 
3. I certify that I, and the study staff, have received the requisite training to conduct this research protocol. 
4. I have read and understand the information in the Investigators’ Brochure (or Manufacturer’s Brochure) 
regarding the risks and potential benefits. I agree to conduct the protocol in accordance with Good 
Clinical Practices (ICH-GCP), the applicable ethical principles, and with local regulatory requirements. In 
accordance with the FDA Modernization Act, I will ensure the registration of the trial on the 
www.clinicaltrials.gov website. 
5. I agree to maintain adequate and accurate records in accordance with CHR policies, Federal, state and 
local laws and regulations.
UCSF Principal Investigator / Study Chair
Printed Name
Signature
Date
Investigator
Site
Printed Name
Signature
Date
Investigator
Site
Printed Name
Signature
Date


Participating Site(s)
All Children’s Hospital, St. Petersberg, FL
Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital, Palo Alto, CA
Abstract
The goal of this Phase II study is to determine whether post-transplant consolidation with azacitidine 
combined with donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) is a safe and effective approach for the prevention of relapse 
in pediatric and young adult patients with hematologic malignancies who have undergone hematopoietic 
stem cell transplantation (HSCT).  
We plan to enroll 67 children with hematologic malignancies (including acute myeloid leukemia, acute 
lymphoblastic leukemia, juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia, and myelodysplastic syndrome) at the time of 
HSCT at three institutions (including UCSF, All Children’s Hospital, St. Petersburg, FL, and Lucile Packard 
Children’s Hospital, Palo Alto, CA).  Patients will be enrolled on the study by day +28, prior to withdrawal of 
immunosuppression or administration of donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI).  They will have donor chimerism 
and minimal residual disease (MRD) testing from the peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM) on day 
+28 ± 7 (as per standard of care).  Based on risk assessment, patients will receive one cycle of low-dose 
azacitidine (40mg/m2 IV/SC daily x 4 days) alone as immunosuppression is tapered.  After tapering 
immunosuppression, chimerism will be repeated and patients will receive up to 6 additional cycles of low-
dose azacitidine. For patients who meet at high risk for relapse, azacitidine will be combined with escalating 
doses of DLI for a maximum of 7 cycles in total.  Risk and safety assessments, including routine laboratory 
parameters, donor chimerism, minimal residual disease, and GHVD activity will be assessed following each 
cycle.
The primary outcome measures will be indicators of relapse risk and safety / toxicity.  Patients will be 
followed for relapse as well as incidence of severe drug toxicities and acute and chronic GVHD until 2 years 
post-transplant.  The study will be considered successful if the rate of relapse at 2 years is <25%, and the 
incidence of Grade IV GVHD and severe drug toxicity are <20%.   Correlative studies will include the effect of 
azacitidine on T cell immune reconstitution, as well as prospective minimal residual disease estimation by 
gene expression / mutation panels in patients with AML.


Study Schema
Figure 1a:  Schema for myeloid malignancies.  Patients will be enrolled on study prior to Day +28.  
Chimerism from PB and BM as well as MRD will be assessed.  Patients with Grade III-IV GVHD will not 
receive study immunomodulatory therapy.  Patients meeting criteria for High-Risk designation will receive 
azacitidine followed by fast withdrawal of immunosuppression.  
Standard-Risk patients will receive 
azacitidine with standard withdrawal of immunosuppression.  Risk assessment will be completed following 
withdrawal of immunosuppression, and patients will be assigned to receive azacitidine alone or azacitidine in 
combination with DLI based on current risk.  Patients may receive up to 6 additional courses of azacitidine 
with or without DLI after withdrawal of immunosuppression; the addition of DLI will be guided by risk 
assessments done prior to each subsequent course. 


Figure 1b:  Schema for acute lymphoblastic leukemia.  Patients will be enrolled on study prior to Day 
+28.  Chimerism from PB and BM as well as MRD (by conventional flow cytometry as well as deep 
sequencing when available) will be assessed.  Patients with Grade III-IV GVHD will not receive study 
immunomodulatory therapy.  Patients meeting criteria for High-Risk designation will receive azacitidine 
followed by fast withdrawal of immunosuppression.  Standard-Risk patients will receive azacitidine with 
standard withdrawal of immunosuppression.  Low-Risk patients will not receive study immunomodulatory 
intervention and will be treated per local SOP.  Risk assessment will be completed following withdrawal of 
immunosuppression, and patients will be assigned to receive standard therapy, azacitidine alone, or 
azacitidine in combination with DLI based on current risk.  Patients may receive up to 6 additional courses of 
azacitidine with or without DLI after withdrawal of immunosuppression; the addition of DLI will be guided by 
risk assessments done prior to each subsequent course. 


Table of Contents
Section No.
Page No.
1.0
Background and Rationale……………………………………………..
10
1.1
Prevention of relapse in pediatric hematologic 
malignancies
1.2
Predictors of post-transplant relapse
1.3
Calcineurin inhibitor dose manipulation as a form of 
immunotherapy
1.4
DLI as a form of immunotherapy
1.5
Azacitidine as a form of immunotherapy 
1.6
Use of combination of azacitidine with DLI as 
immunotherapy in patients with leukemic relapse
1.7
Safety of azacitidine
1.8
Use of azacitidine in children
1.9
Lineage specific chimerism analysis
1.10
Minimal residual disease monitoring of AML in the 
post-transplant setting
1.11
Preliminary data
1.12
Rationale
2.0
Objectives………………………………………………………………...
14
2.1
Primary Objectives
2.2
Hypotheses
3.0
Study Design and Eligibility Criteria…………………………………...
14
3.1
Study Design
3.2
Inclusion Criteria
3.3
Exclusion Criteria
4.0
Patient Registration……………………………………………………..
15
4.1
Recruitment
4.2
Registration
5.0
Investigational Intervention Plan……………………………………….
15
5.1
Collection of Patient Demographic Information
5.2
Schedule of testing
5.3
Risk stratification
5.4
Chimerism assessment
5.5
Criteria for standard or fast withdrawal of 
immunosuppression (SWI vs FWI)
5.6
Schedule of SWI vs FWI
5.7
Schedule of azacitidine administration during SWI or 
FWI
5.8
Criteria for DLI
5.9
Intra-patient DLI dose escalation in combination 
with azacitidine
5.10
Schedule of safety parameter studies
5.11
Schedule of correlative studies
5.12
Duration of study participation and follow-up


6.0
Toxicity Management and Dose Modifications………………………..
22
6.1
DLI Toxicity (GVHD)
6.2
Azacitidine Toxicity 
7.0
Criteria for Termination……………………………………………….…
23
7.1
Conditions for terminating the study
7.2
Conditions for terminating individual patient participation on the study
8.0
Statistical Considerations………………………………………………
23
8.1
Primary efficacy definitions
8.2
Secondary exploratory endpoints
8.3
Primary safety endpoint definitions
8.4
Sample size
8.5
Estimated duration of the study
8.6
Statistical analyses
8.7
Interim analysis and stopping rules for safety and 
efficacy
9.0
Risks………………………………………………………………………
25
9.1
Graft vs host disease
9.2
Azacitidine risks
9.3
Risk of extramedullary relapse
9.4
Chimerism testing risks
9.5
Risks of overtreatment
10.0
Data and Safety Monitoring Plan………………………………………
28
10.1
Oversight and monitoring plan
10.2
Monitoring and reporting guidelines
10.3
Regulatory considerations
10.4
Independent ethics committees / Institutional Review 
Board
10.5
Data and Safety Monitoring Committee contacts
11.0
Adverse Events………………………………………………………….
28
11.1
Grading adverse events and serious adverse events
11.2
Adverse event definitions
11.3
Adverse event review and monitoring
11.4
Definition of Adverse Event
11.5
Adverse reaction
11.6
Suspected
11.7
Unexpected
11.8
Serious
11.9
Life threatening
11.10 Evaluation of Adverse Event
11.11 NCI Common Terminaology for Adverse Events (CTCAE)
11.12 Follow-up of Adverse Events
11.13 Adverse Event Reporting
11.14 Expedited Reporting
11.15 Review of Adverse Event Rates
11.16 SAE Reports associated with Study Stopping Rules
11.17 DSMC review of Treatment Toxicities
11.18 Classification of GVHD


11.19 Hematopoietic Toxicities
12.0
Benefits………………………………………………………………..…
33
13.0
Alternatives………………………………………………………………
33
14.0
Cost……………………………………………………………………….
33
15.0
Record Keeping and record Retention………………………………..
33
16.0
Coordinating Center Documentation of Distribution…………………
33
17.0 
Multicenter Communication…………………………………………….
34
18.0
Protection of Human Subjects………………………………………….
34
18.1
Protection from unnecessary harm
18.2
Protection of privacy
19.0
Appendices
19.1 Chimerism analysis…………………………………….
36
19.2 Assessment of cGVHD………………………………...
37
19.3 Donor Lymphocyte Infusion Standard 
Operating Procedure……………………………………
39
19.4 Azacitidine administration………………………………
44
19.5 Azacitidine dose adjustments………………………….
45
19.6 Procedure for AML gene expression and 
mutation panel testing (Hourigan Lab)……………….
46
19.7 Multicenter institutional studies………………………..
48
19.8 UCSF Policies/Procedures for Required
Regulatory Documents…………………………………
50
20.0
References……………………………………………………………….
54


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AE 
adverse event
aGVHD 
acute GVHD
ALL 
acute lymphoblastic leukemia
ALT 
alanine transaminase
AML 
acute myelogenous leukemia
ANC 
absolute neutrophil count
BM 
bone marrow
cGVHD 
chronic GVHD
CHR 
Committee on Human Research (UCSF IRB)
CMV 
cytomegalovirus
CRC 
Clinical Research Coordinator
CRF 
case report form
CSA 
Cyclosporine A
CTC 
Common Toxicity Criteria
CTMS 
clinical trials management system
DLI 
donor lymphocyte infusion
DSMC 
Data and Safety Monitoring Committee
EBV 
Epstein-Barr Virus
FDA 
Food and Drug Administration
FWI 
Fast Withdrawal of Immunosuppression
GCP 
Good Clinical Practice
GVHD 
graft-versus-host-disease
GVL 
graft versus leukemia
HDFCCC 
Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
HGB 
hemoglobin
ICH 
International Conference on Harmonization
IRB 
Institutional Review Board
JMML 
juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia
KPS 
Karnofsky Performance Status
MC 
mixed chimerism
MDS 
myelodysplastic syndrome
MRD 
minimal residual disease
NCI 
National Cancer Institute
PB 
peripheral blood
PBMTC 
Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplant Consortium
PI 
Principal Investigator
PRC 
UCSF Protocol Review Committee
RBC 
red blood cell
SAE 
serious adverse event
STR 
short tandem repeats
WBC 
white blood cell


1.0Background and Rationale
1.1
Prevention of relapse in pediatric hematologic malignancies
Multiple hematologic malignancies, such as acute myeloid leukemia (AML), acute 
lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML) and myelodysplastic 
syndrome (MDS) are treated with myeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation 
(HSCT) in order to safely deliver high doses of anti-neoplastic therapy, and to take advantage 
of donor-derived immune cells to produce an allogeneic “graft-versus-leukemia” effect.  As 
conditioning regimens and supportive care measures improve, transplant-related morbidity 
and mortality have decreased, such that relapse is the primary cause of treatment failure in 
these patients.  Recent data for pediatric ALL, AML, and JMML demonstrate a 5-year relapse 
rate of 30-40% (1-3).  Survival rates in patients who relapse following transplant are <20% at 
4 years (4).  
Additional strategies for the prevention of post-transplant relapse are needed.  This study 
combines minimal residual disease by high throughput sequencing, multiparametric flow 
MRD, and donor chimerism to direct the application of post-transplant immunomodulatory 
therapy with azacitidine and donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI).  By administering this therapy to 
patients at highest risk of relapse, this study aims to decrease relapse rates while maintaining 
a low risk of GVHD. 
1.2
Predictors of post-transplant relapse
Mixed chimerism (MC) is the presence of both host’s and donor’s hematopoietic cells after 
allogeneic transplant. With the introduction of quantitative and frequent measurements of 
chimerism, the relationship between the presence of host cells and the relapse of acute 
leukemias after allogeneic transplant was recognized. In 1998, Bader et al. showed that 
pediatric patients with increasing amount of host (autologous) cells on their chimerism testing 
following allogeneic transplant have significantly increased risk of relapse (5). In their study, 
36/54 children had complete donor chimerism and 19% of them relapsed, 10/54 children had 
increasing amounts of host cells post-transplant (increasing host chimerism) and 90% of them 
relapsed; in contrast, 8/54 children had decreasing amount of host cells following transplant 
(decreasing host chimerism) and none of them relapsed (5). Similar results were obtained by 
Barrios et al. in adults; 93% of patients with increasing host chimerism and 27% of patients 
with full donor chimerism relapsed, respectively (6).
Patients with increasing host chimerism sustained relapses between days 36 and 450 of their 
follow-up. Increasing host chimerism preceded relapse by a median of 74 days (6).  The 
investigators concluded that frequent and sensitive measurement of chimerism after 
transplant is a useful tool for identifying a group of patients with a very high risk of relapse in 
whom further immunotherapy would be justified.  Additionally, Bader and colleagues studied 
the origin of cells found in patients with mixed chimerism. In the early post-transplant period, 
mixed chimerism was caused predominantly by normal recipient hematopoietic cells. This 
finding supports the hypothesis that a state of mixed hematopoietic chimerism may reduce the 
clinical GVL effect of alloreactive donor-derived effector cells in patients with acute leukemias, 
and thus facilitate the proliferation of residual malignant cells that may have survived the 
preparative regimen (7).
The presence of minimal residual disease (MRD), either immediately prior to HSCT, or 
following HSCT, has been correlated with decreased survival and increased risk of relapse in 
both ALL (8) AML (9) patients (10).  
An MRD-guided strategy of reduction of 
immunosuppression without DLI or azacitidine resulted in overall survival of 72% in patients 
with MRD <0.1%, and 40.4% in those with MRD>0.1% (11).  This protocol plans to build on 


this approach through risk stratification based on MRD and chimerism, and post-transplant 
immunomodulation with not only fast withdrawal of immunosuppression, but also azacitidine 
and escalating doses of DLI.
1.3
Calcineurin inhibitor dose manipulation as a form of immunotherapy
In a randomized study that looked at the effect of dose of cyclosporine A (CSA) on leukemia 
relapse after transplant, disease-free survival was superior in patients receiving low dose CSA 
(1mg/kg/day) than in those receiving high dose CSA (5 mg/kg/day) (12). This benefit of low 
dose CSA persisted 10-years after transplant, but only in patients younger than 30 years of 
age, as the older patients receiving low CSA dose had an increased risk of transplant-related 
complications (13).  A similar study in children comparing 1 mg/kg/day of CSA vs. 3 mg/kg/day 
showed relapse rates of 15% vs. 41% in low and high CSA dose groups, respectively (14). A 
study looking into the length of treatment with CSA (60 vs. 180 days) indicated that CSA can 
be safely stopped at 60 days in patients who did not have evidence of acute GVHD (15).
1.4
DLI as a form of immunotherapy  
Donor lymphocyte infusions have been successfully used in patients with chronic 
myelogenous leukemia who relapse after transplant (16, 17). However, DLI is far less 
successful when given to acute leukemia patients who relapse after transplant. While the 
remission induction rate with DLI for CML is 80% and the effect appears to be prolonged, the 
remission induction rate for patients with acute leukemia is 15 – 25%, and often is of short 
duration (18). The failure of donor lymphocytes in the acute leukemia setting may be due to 
inadequate graft vs. leukemia effect in the presence of clinical relapse with a large leukemic 
cell burden. In order to avoid a large leukemic cell burden, investigators have moved to pre-
emptive use of DLI in patients at a high risk for relapse. DLI have been extensively used in the 
setting of non-myeloablative or reduced toxicity transplantation (19, 20).
1.5
Azacitidine as a form of immunotherapy
Demethylating agents such as azacitidine and decitabine have various effects on multiple 
facets of the immune system.  In vitro studies of AML and melanoma cells have demonstrated 
that co-culture with decitabine results in increased class I and II MHC expression (21, 22).  
Azacitidine administered to patients following allogeneic transplantation has been associated 
with a concomitant increase in cytotoxic CD8+ T cells and regulatory T cells, potentially 
resulting in increased GvL without commensurate increase in GVHD (23).  Effects on NK cells 
are mixed: while decitabine has been shown to increase NKG2D-dependent sensitivity of AML 
cells to NK-mediated killing in vitro (24), azacitidine increases KIR expression (25, 26), and 
decreases expression of TRAIL, NKG2D, and NKp46 (27).  
Azacitidine has been used in patients safely as monotherapy.  In a dose-finding study, 
azacitidine was used as prophylactic / maintenance therapy in heavily pretreated 
refractory/relapsed AML/MDS patients following allogeneic transplant, and a dose of 32 
mg/m2 given for 5 days was shown to be safe for at least 4 cycles (28).  1 year EFS in this 
cohort was 58%.  Azacitidine monotherapy has also been studied in AML patients following 
allogeneic transplantation as pre-emptive therapy for declining CD34 chimerism (RELAZA 
trial) (29).  Azacitidine 75mg/m2/day x 7 days was administered every 28 days in AML patients 
with declining chimerism post-transplant; of 20 patients, 10 achieved an increase in CD34+ 
donor chimerism, and 3 of these remained relapse-free for >6 months.  Although there is less 
data for the use of demethylating agents in ALL, there is preclinical evidence that they may be 
effective (30), and there is early clinical indication that they may be effective in a subset of 
these patients (31).  


1.6
Use of azacitidine with DLI as immunotherapy in patients with leukemic relapse
Azacitidine has been administered safely in combination with DLI for patients with AML 
relapse 30 days to 4 years post-transplant (32).  The combination was shown to be active, 
inducing CR in 7 of 30 patients, with no increased risk of GVHD or azacitidine toxicity.  
Decitabine has also been used for relapse in 14 ALL, AML, and CML patients following 
transplant.  High doses of 100-150 mg/m2 Q12h x 5 days followed by DLI resulted in a 
response in 57% of patients, including one of two ALL patients (33).  In addition, a lower 
(hypomethylating) dose of 20mg/m2 IV x 5 days is also effective in patients with MDS (34). 
1.7
Safety of Azacitidine
In the 2010 Phase I study of azacitidine used post-transplant in 45 very-high risk patients, the 
drug was well-tolerated at a maximum dose of 40mg/m2/day x 5 days (28).  In terms of 
hematologic toxicity, there was no correlation between white blood cell or platelet count at the 
start of maintenance and development of hematologic toxicities.  They observed reversible 
grade 1-2 or 3 thrombocytopenia (n = 7 and n = 2), and in 1 of 2 patients receiving 40 mg/m2. 
Grade 1-2 neutropenia was documented in 7 cases.
Other toxicities included:  Grade 1 nausea (n = 9), Grade 2 fatigue (n = 6), Grade 1-2 
transaminases elevation (n=3), Pruritus (n=1), cholecystitis (n=1), grade 1 confusion (n =2), 
grade 2 creatinine elevation (n = 1), oral ulcers (n = 2).  There were also 3 cases of possible 
ocular toxicity: conjunctival erythema; retina hemorrhage with platelet count drop to 
50,000/mm3 (possibly pre-existing); and papilledema.
The most serious possibly drug-related adverse event was 1 case of pulmonary hemorrhage 
because of fungal pneumonia, which occurred in a patient receiving a second HSCT, who 
evolved with thrombocytopenia and multiorgan failure.  Infections that occurred during the 
treatment period were considered to be within the expected profile seen in this population.
1.8
Use of Azacitidine in Children
Azacitidine has been used safely in children.  The maximum tolerated dose was examined in 
children as early as 1973. Children ages 2 to 17 years were treated with azacitidine 
monotherapy for 5 days every 14 days.  The maximum tolerated dose was 150-200 mg/m2 
(35).  Kalwinsky et al used azacitidine in 68 previously untreated pediatric AML patients at a 
dose of 300mg/m2 on day 4 and 5 in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy (36).  A phase 
II study in 1996 randomized 41 pediatric patients with refractory disease to receive cytotoxic 
chemotherapy with or without azacitidine at a dose of 250mg/m2/day x 2 days), with a 
significantly higher CR rate in the group of children who received azacitidine (37). 
1.9
Lineage specific chimerism analysis
Monitoring chimerism in different hematopoietic cell lineages can increase the sensitivity of 
detecting the minority population when there are lineage differences in the extent of mixed 
chimerism. Zetterquist et al. showed that monitoring mixed chimerism in B-cell lineage 
correlated well with molecular confirmation of minimal residual disease and was detectable 
2.5 months before morphologic relapse (38). Similarly, Mattson et al. showed that MC in 
CD13+ and CD33+ cell lineage in patients with AML could detect relapse a median of 66 days 
before hematologic relapse (39). Our feasibility study confirmed that leukemia-specific lineage 
mixed chimerism heralds relapse (40).
1.10 Minimal residual disease monitoring of AML in the post-transplant setting
In addition to chimerism analysis in the post allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation 
(allo-HSCT) setting, a variety of other high sensitivity methods for quantification of measurable 
disease burden in AML have been described and have recently been reviewed (10, 41-43), 
that allow for risk stratification when used prior to allo-HSCT and early prediction of impending 


clinically evident relapse when used in surveillance monitoring post allo-HSCT.   These high 
sensitivity measures of AML disease burden may also help quantify the efficacy of post allo-
HSCT maintenance interventions (29, 43).  The optimal MRD monitoring strategy in AML is a 
subject of current investigation.
1.11 Preliminary data
Our group has been studying the use of subset chimerism testing and pre-emptive 
immunotherapy with fast withdrawal of immunosuppression (FWI) and donor lymphocyte 
infusion (DLI) since 2005. Our prospective multi-institutional study evaluated the feasibility of 
longitudinal chimerism testing in a central laboratory (including WB, CD3+, and leukemia-
specific lineage chimerism) in patients with a variety of hematologic malignancies, and 
evaluated the feasibility of fast withdrawal of immunosuppression based on WB chimerism 
results. Centralized chimerism testing was feasible and showed low inter-assay variability. 
Increasing mixed chimerism (MC) in WB was not useful as a predictor of relapse in our study. 
The presence of full donor chimerism in WB, CD3+ and leukemia-specific lineages on all 
measurements was related to a significantly lower risk of relapse than the presence of MC in 
either subset (11%% vs 71%, respectively; P=0.03). Increasing host chimerism in leukemia-
specific lineage heralds relapse, but it was not detected early enough to allow immunotherapy. 
The conclusion of the study was that the goal of preemptive immunotherapy should be to 
achieve full donor chimerism in WB in CD3+ and leukemia-specific lineages, in an effort to 
prevent relapse before donor chimerism declines (40). 
In a recent prospective UCSF analysis, 43 children (25 AML, 18 ALL,) underwent 
myeloablative BMT or PBSCT followed by immunomodulatory therapy (IT) between 2009 and 
2012 (44).  Patients with FDC in BM and PB at day 30 or evidence of GVHD were assigned to 
observation only (N=12).  Patients with mixed chimerism (regardless of MRD) were assigned 
to intervention.  Intervention consisted of fast withdrawal of immunosuppression (FWI) in 26 
patients; 14 of these also received DLI. Five patients could not be assigned due to early death 
or relapse.  Overall survival at a median of 30 months was 54%. Toxicity was acceptable, with 
an acute GVHD rate of 19% in the intervention arm, and a toxic death rate of 4%.  Relapse 
was observed in 10/38 patients; 8 of the 10 relapses occurred in the intervention arm 
(associated with mixed chimerism).  Four of these occurred late at >24 months post-
transplant. 
The most powerful predictor of post-transplant relapse was BM chimerism in the leukemia-
specific subset. Mixed chimerism was associated with a 41% relapse rate, compared to a 6% 
rate in patients with full donor chimerism (p=0.001).  Mixed chimerism in the BM CD34 subset 
was also significantly associated with increased risk of relapse (38% vs 10%, p=0.04).  
Interestingly, no patients who demonstrated full donor chimerism in all subsets (CD3, CD34, 
and leukemia-specific CD3 or CD19) relapsed (0 out of 7 patients), compared to a relapse 
rate of 37% in patients demonstrating mixed chimerism in any subset (p=0.02). 
1.12 Rationale
Our most recent approach to decrease the risk of relapse post-transplant has focused on 
immunomodulatory therapy including fast withdrawal of calcineurin inhibitor (FWI) and 
administration of donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI).  Our data has demonstrated that FWI with 
or without DLI administered to patients with mixed chimerism clearly prolongs survival.  
However, patients who were full donor chimeras remained at risk for relapse if they did not 
develop GVHD, as they were not eligible for immunomodulatory therapy. Therefore, additional 
therapy is required for this group of patients with higher risk of relapse.


An attractive option for post-transplant consolidation that has the potential to synergize with 
immunomodulatory therapy is the administration of a hypomethylating agent such as 
azacitidine.  The main advantages to using this class of agents compared to other agents are:

They are relatively safe / tolerable, so can be used in patients with recovering organ 
function post-transplant.

They are potentially synergistic with immunotherapy, augmenting the Graft versus 
Leukemia (GvL) effect.

They may provide protection against GvHD (the primary risk of post-transplant 
immunomodulation) even while preserving GvL effect.

They can be applied indiscriminately to most types of AML and other myeloid 
malignancies (they do not require a specific target, unlike newer “targeted” therapies).
2.0Objectives
2.1
Primary Objectives
2.1.1
To evaluate the efficacy of the risk-adaptive approach to relapse reduction (based on 
the relapse rate) with a combination of azacitidine and donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) 
in pediatric patients with AML, ALL, or MDS treated with stem cell transplantation.  
2.1.2
To investigate the safety and toxicity of the treatment with a combination of azacitidine 
and donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) in pediatric patients with AML, ALL, or MDS 
treated with stem cell transplantation.
2.2
Secondary / Exploratory Objectives
2.2.1
To evaluate the effect of risk-adapted azacitidine and DLI on other outcomes such as 
relapse-free survival and median time to relapse.  
2.2.2
To evaluate the effect of post-transplant azacitidine on immune function, including T 
cell function.
2.2.3
To evaluate the feasibility and utility of a gene-expression platform for the detection of 
minimal residual disease with high sensitivity in AML patients following HSCT. 
2.3
Hypotheses
2.3.1
In patients with acute leukemia, the use of azacitidine and DLI is associated with a 
lower rate of relapse at two years compared with historical controls.  
2.3.2
In patients at high risk for post-transplant relapse, the use of azacitidine and DLI is 
associated with a low rate of Grade III-IV GvHD or drug-related severe adverse 
events.  
3.0Study Design and Eligibility Criteria
3.1
Study Design (see also Study Schema, page 3)
3.1.1
We propose a Phase II single-arm trial of azacitidine (IV or SC) in combination with 
escalating donor lymphocyte infusions (DLI).  This study will be open to patients with 
ALL, AML, JMML, or MDS.   
3.1.2
The first cycle of azacitidine will be administered during withdrawal of 
immunosuppression for patients not developing severe organ toxicity or Grade III-IV 
GVHD.  
3.1.3
After the initial cycle during withdrawal of immunosuppression (duration is based on 
day 28 PB chimerism), azacitidine is given for 4 days in 6-week cycles (+/- 2 weeks) at 
a dose of 40 mg/m2/day.  
3.1.4
For patients meeting High Risk criteria who have available cell product, DLI is given on 
day 5 of each cycle in escalating doses.  Peripheral blood chimerism and MRD is 
assessed after week 4, prior to initiating the next cycle.  BM chimerism and MRD is 


obtained at regular intervals prior to specified cycles as per the study schedule.  
Patients will receive up to 7 cycles as tolerated.
3.1.5
Patients will be followed by laboratory monitoring and physician evaluation prior to 
each cycle.  Weekly labs will be obtained and will include toxicity monitoring (CBC, 
LFTs, and electrolytes) and correlative studies, such as immunophenotype and T cell 
function by PHA.  Patients will be followed for two years to study toxicity and GVHD 
outcomes as well as relapse incidence.  
3.2
Inclusion Criteria
3.2.1
Patients age 0 – 29.9 years undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplant using a 
peripheral blood stem cell source.
3.2.1.1
Patients receiving bone marrow or umbilical cord blood as a stem cell source 
may also be considered for enrollment with acknowledgement that if there is 
insufficient product available for DLI, the patient will receive azacitidine 
without DLI per Standard-Risk treatment.
3.2.2
Patients with one of the following diagnoses:  
3.2.2.1
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML)
3.2.2.2
Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)
3.2.2.3
Juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML)
3.2.2.4
Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)
3.3
Exclusion Criteria:
3.3.1
Patients who have had a prior transplant  
3.3.2
Patients receiving a haploidentical/T cell depleted transplant
3.3.3
Patients with Fanconi anemia or other cancer-predisposition syndromes
3.3.4
Patients with expected survival <12 weeks
3.3.5
Lansky score <60%
4.0
Patient Registration
4.1
Recruitment:  
Patients will be recruited to the study by a bone marrow transplant physician during pre- 
transplant clinic visits, or during hospital admission. Patients will be consented for study any 
time between pre-transplant consent conference and day +28; enrollment will occur before 
day +28 and prior to withdrawal of immunosuppression.
4.2
Registration: 
All prospective patients will undergo an informed consent conference during which their 
transplant physician will explain risks, benefits and alternatives to the study participation. The 
assent of the recipient will be obtained when age appropriate, as well as parental permission. 
To register patients, the attending physician will contact the Study Chair, 
 
 The investigator will 
complete the eligibility forms (provided in the Case Report Form packet) and fax them per the 
instructions on the form to either the UCSF PI or UCSF Study Coordinator. Pertinent 
information will be maintained at UCSF on each enrolled patient. 
5.0
Investigational Intervention Plan
5.1
Collection of Patient Demographic Information
5.1.1
Age
5.1.2
Disease type / cytogenetics / genetic risk classification
5.1.3
Disease status at HSCT (site of disease, MRD status at each site)


Pre-transplant MRD must be collected within 28 days prior to transplant.
5.1.4
Conditioning regimen (Bu/Flu, TBI/Cy, others)
5.1.5
Donor (related versus unrelated)
5.1.6
HLA match
5.1.7
GVHD prophylaxis (use of steroids or other agents; use of calcineurin inhibitor and 
target; use of serotherapy)
5.2
Schedule of Testing
5.2.1
BM studies to be obtained with each BM exam (not including correlative samples):

Chimerism:

Chimerism <100% in any lineage / cell subset will be designated 
“Mixed Donor Chimerism” (MDC)

Chimerism of 100% in all lineages / subsets will be designated “Full 
Donor Chimerism” (FDC)

Morphology

Minimal residual disease (MRD):

Multiparametric flow cytometry, FISH, PCR, or deep sequencing (DS-
MRD, Sequenta ClonoSIGHT, Adaptive) should be sent as clinically 
indicated, but results are not required prior to initiation of next cycle.  
Preliminary risk stratification can be assigned and adjusted when 
results are available.
MRD positivity is defined as detectable disease by the most sensitive 
method used for each patient. In some cases this will be limited to flow 
cytometry.  PCR and deep-sequencing MRD may also define MRD 
positivity in patients for whom these tests are available.
5.2.2
First BM and PB chimerism tests are due at Day +28 but can be done between Day 
+21 and Day +42 when ANC >500 x 3 days.  

A minimum of 8 ml of each BM and PB in ACD tube will be sent to the UCSF 
or local Immunogenetics clinical laboratory for chimerism testing.
5.2.3
When available locally, whole blood chimerism and subset (CD3, CD14/15, and CD19) 
chimerism will be tested and prioritized according to underlying disease:

For T-cell malignancy: CD3 > CD14/15 

For B-cell malignancy: CD3 > CD19 > CD14/15

For myeloid malignancy: CD3 > CD14/15 
5.2.4
Bone marrow subset chimerism will be similarly prioritized:

For T-cell malignancy: CD34> CD3 

For B-cell malignancy: CD34 > CD19 > CD3

For myeloid malignancy: CD34 > CD33 > CD3
5.2.5
If PB converts to FDC, BM must be obtained for chimerism prior to starting the next 
cycle in order to determine eligibility for further DLI.  
Time point
Required Study
Comments
Day +21 through Day +42
PB Chimerism
PB MRD*
BM Chimerism
BM MRD
Required prior to Cycle 1 
(Aza alone)
2-8 weeks following completion of 
withdrawal of immunosuppression.
PB chimerism
PB MRD*
Required prior to Cycle 2 
(Aza +/- DLI)
4-8 weeks following initiation of Cycle 2
PB Chimerism
PB MRD*
BM chimerism
Required prior to Cycle 3 
(Aza +/- DLI)


Time point
Required Study
Comments
BM MRD
4-8 weeks following initiation of Cycle 3
PB chimerism
PB MRD*
Required prior to Cycle 4 
(Aza +/- DLI)
4-8 weeks following initiation of Cycle 4
PB chimerism
PB MRD*
BM chimerism
BM MRD
Required prior to Cycle 5 
(Aza +/- DLI)
4-8 weeks following initiation of Cycle 5
PB chimerism
PB MRD*
Required prior to Cycle 6 
(Aza +/- DLI)
4-8 weeks following initiation of Cycle 6
PB chimerism
PB MRD*
BM chimerism
BM MRD
Required prior to Cycle 7 
(Aza +/- DLI)
Table 1:  Schedule of chimerism and MRD analysis for each cycle.  PB DS-MRD is 
recommended for ALL patients when available. May omit PB MRD if concurrent BM MRD sample 
is sent. Peripheral blood MRD by flow cytometry as clinically indicated.
5.3
Risk Stratification
5.3.1
Risk is evaluated and assigned prior to each azacitidine cycle based on clinical testing 
specific to that patient’s disease.  
5.3.2
For patients with MDS, any evidence of disease may be used to stratify the patient 
accordingly.   In the absence of evidence of persistent disease, chimerism will be used 
to stratify the patient.  MDS patients with no evidence of disease and 100% chimerism 
will be stratified as standard risk.
5.3.3
Peripheral blood disease assessment will be done as clinically indicated.  Peripheral 
blood MRD by deep sequencing (if positive) may be used to risk-stratify ALL patients 
instead of bone marrow MRD.  Any evidence of disease in peripheral blood for patients 
with AML/JMML or MDS will prompt BM evaluation as clinically indicated.  In this 
instance, study treatment may continue after BM evaluation is complete. 
5.3.4
Risk stratification criteria:

Low Risk

May only be applied to acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients

All of the following
o
Pre-transplant deep sequencing MRD negative, AND
o
All post-transplant deep sequencing MRD samples negative, AND
o
Any chimerism or GVHD status 

ALL patients with negative deep-sequencing MRD pre- and post-
transplant will be treated as low-risk regardless of chimerism

Standard Risk

Active Grade I GVHD, OR

Any history of Grade II (or higher) GVHD, OR

All of the following
o
Full Donor Chimerism AND 
o
Pre-HSCT MRD <10-5 (bone marrow) AND 
o
Post-HSCT MRD <10-5 (bone marrow), unless 3-fold increase is 
observed

High Risk

No active acute or chronic GVHD, AND

No history of Grade II (or higher) acute GVHD or chronic GVHD, AND



Any of the following:
o
Mixed chimerism OR 
o
Pre-HSCT MRD > 1 x 10-5 OR 
o
Post-HSCT MRD at day 28 or later >=10-5 once, OR
o
Post-HSCT MRD at day 28 or later >=10-6 with >=3-fold increase on 
any subsequent measurement (need not be consecutive).

Post-HSCT MRD <1 x 10-5 is treated as Standard Risk until a 3-
fold increase is documented. 
5.4
Chimerism assessment
5.4.1
Chimerism assessment will be done at the UCSF Immunogenetics and 
Transplantation Laboratory 
, or at the local 
institution for collaborating sites. Chimerism will be assessed using short tandem 
repeats (STR) on whole blood and bone marrow and on cell subsets when such 
testing is available.  Peripheral blood subset analyses will include whole blood CD3+, 
and CD14/15 subsets for all patients. Patients with B-cell malignancies will also have 
CD19+ subset tested.  For bone marrow specimens, CD34+ will also be analyzed in all 
patients, in addition to disease-specific subsets. 
5.4.2
Patients with any degree of host chimerism detected in any subset from either 
peripheral blood or bone marrow will be considered high risk.
5.5
Criteria for standard or fast withdrawal of immunosuppression (SWI versus FWI)
5.5.1
GVHD, MRD, and chimerism status must be assessed prior to each cycle and applied 
to risk stratification as above. 
5.5.2
If the patient meets High-Risk criteria, then fast withdrawal of immunosuppression 
(FWI) will be initiated as early as Day +30.  
5.5.3
If patient meets Standard-Risk criteria (or Low-Risk criteria for ALL patients), standard 
withdrawal of immunosuppression (SWI) will be initiated.  
5.6
Schedule of standard and fast withdrawal of immunosuppression (SWI versus FWI)
5.6.1
Standard withdrawal of immunosuppression will be performed per institutional 
standard procedure.  Suggested course of taper is over 10 weeks starting at day 30-
50. 
5.6.2
Fast withdrawal of immunosuppression will be performed per institutional standard 
procedure.  Suggested course of taper is over 2-4 weeks starting at day 30-50.  
5.7
Schedule of azacitidine administration 
Azacitidine may be held or dose-adjusted based on the parameters below.  If azacitidine is 
held > 6 weeks, the patient will remain on study but will be included in a separate analysis 
with regard to safety and efficacy.  
5.7.1
Cytopenias prior to Cycle 1 require dose reductions as outlined below. Cytopenias 
following subsequent cycles require dose adjustments based on nadir counts as 
outlined in appendix 5.

For platelets <30,000/uL, 50% dose reduction is recommended.

If platelet transfusion dependent, hold therapy until platelets >30,000/uL.

For neutrophils <750 not responsive to GCSF, 50% dose reduction is 
recommended.

For neutrophils <500 not responsive to GCSF, hold therapy until toxicity improves. 
5.7.2
Renal insufficiency:

Creatinine <2X baseline: No dose adjustment is required.

Creatinine 2-3X above baseline: Hold therapy until AKI resolves.  Restart therapy 
at 50% dose reduction.  If well-tolerated, full dose may be administered.
5.7.3
Hepatotoxicity:



AST/ALT <5x ULN: No dose adjustment is required.

AST/ALT 5-20x ULN: Hold therapy until transaminitis resolves.  May consider 50% 
dose reduction and close monitoring.  

AST/ALT >20x ULN: Hold therapy until transaminitis resolves

Total bilirubin 3-10x ULN: Hold therapy until resolution; may consider 50% dose 
reduction and close monitoring

Total bilirubin >10x ULN: Hold therapy until resolution. 
5.7.4
For other toxicities, repeat test twice weekly:

Other laboratory abnormalities to be evaluated on a per-patient basis. Options 
include holding azacitidine until resolution, versus starting azacitidine at 50% dose 
reduction at the PI and treating physician’s discretion.
5.7.5
Except for ALL patients classified as Low Risk, administration of azacitidine will 
commence during SWI or FWI if criteria are met (see section 6.2 for dose adjustment 
guidelines). 

Azacitidine will be given at a dose of 40mg /m2 IV or SC daily for 4 days
5.7.6
Administration of azacitidine following SWI or FWI:

PB and BM chimerism and MRD will be obtained as above and risk will be re-
assessed.

No Intervention:  For Low Risk ALL patients, azacitidine will be deferred. Patients 
will receive standard treatment and will be followed by BM every 3 months for 9-12 
months. 

Azacitidine without DLI: Patients meeting Standard Risk criteria will receive 
azacitidine without DLI at a dose of 40mg/m2 IV or SC x 4 days every 6 weeks. DLI 
should be considered for patients with resolved Grade 2 GHVD if pre- or post-
transplant MRD is positive.

Azacitidine with DLI:  Patients meeting High Risk criteria, who also have available 
cells, will receive DLI in addition to azacitidine.  Patients with history of Grade 2 
GVHD (which has resolved) may also receive DLI if pre- or post-transplant MRD is 
positive at the discretion of the treating physician.  
o
Administration of azacitidine following withdrawal of immunosuppression 
will commence (typically on a Monday) 2-8 weeks following completion 
of SWI/FWI (see section 6.2 for dose adjustments).
o
Azacitidine will be given at a dose of 40mg /m2 IV or SC daily for 4 days 
every 6 weeks. 
o
Escalating doses of DLI will be administered (typically on a Friday) within 
5 days following the last dose of azacitidine every cycle (see section 5.8 
for DLI schedule).
o
For patients with negative pre- and post-transplant MRD:  

Once MDC resolves to FDC in both blood and bone marrow, DLI 
will be discontinued and patient will continue to receive azacitidine 
alone for a maximum of 7 cycles as tolerated.  

If FDC is detected in blood, bone marrow chimerism must be 
obtained and confirmed to be mixed before proceeding with DLI. 

If DLI is administered without azacitidine during cycles 2 through 7, the subject 
should continue with all subsequent study assessments, but will be analyzed 
separately with regard to safety and efficacy.

Cycles may be delayed for reasons such as toxicity, as per dose adjustment 
section 6.0. 

For all patients who receive azacitidine, a total of 7 cycles may be administered as 
tolerated.


5.8
Criteria for DLI
5.8.1
Deep Sequencing-MRD (ALL only)

For Low-Risk ALL patients with Deep Sequencing-MRD negative on all 
measurements before and after transplant, azacitidine and DLI administration will 
not be given.  

Low-Risk ALL patients will undergo BM MRD and chimerism exams every 3 
months for the first 9-12 months post-transplant.  Intervention will be resumed if 
MRD becomes positive.
5.8.2
Mixed Chimerism

Patients with persistent MDC following withdrawal of immunosuppression will 
receive DLI with the next cycle of azacitidine.  Mixed chimerism of low purity 
should be repeated before proceeding with DLI and/or FWI in order to ensure 
mixed chimerism.  If MDC persists after cycle 7, DLI may be administered without 
azacitidine after discussion with the study chair.  

Patients who revert to MDC on subsequent PB or BM testing will receive DLI with 
the next cycle of azacitidine. 

Patients with FDC are generally not eligible for further DLI except as described 
below.
5.8.3
Pre-Transplant MRD positive

Patients with pre-transplant MRD >10-5 are eligible to receive escalating DLI 
regardless of chimerism status if there is no active GVHD.

If no active GVHD, DLI should continue until maximum DLI dose is achieved.  
5.8.4
Post-Transplant MRD positive 

For patients with persistent MRD post-transplant (>1x10-5 or 1x10-6 and increasing) 
and with no active GVHD, azacitidine and escalating doses of DLI should be 
administered. 

DLI should be escalated to maximum dose and administered while MRD remains 
positive.  If MRD is positive after cycle 7, DLI may be administered with or without 
azacitidine after discussion with the study chair.
5.9
Intra-patient DLI dose escalation to be used on day 5 (following 4 days of azacitidine):
5.9.1
Mismatched related donor or any unrelated donor:

1st dose: 5 x 105 /kg -- 1 x 106 /kg of CD3+ cells

2nd dose: 1 x 106/kg -- 1 x 107 /kg of CD3+ cells

3rd and all subsequent doses:  1 x 107 /kg -- 5 x 107/kg of CD3+ cells
5.9.2
Matched related donor:

1st dose: 1 x 107 /kg of CD3+ cells

2nd and subsequent doses: 5 x 107 /kg of CD3+ cells
5.9.3
Peripheral blood chimerism will be repeated during or after week 4 of every cycle, and 
the next cycle will not be initiated until results are obtained.
5.10
Schedule of safety parameter studies
5.10.1 Pre-therapy laboratory evaluations should be completed within 7 days prior to each 
azacitidine cycle:

Liver function (AST, ALT, bilirubin) and renal function (creatinine) tests

Complete blood count (consider bone marrow aspiration if cytopenias develop if 
clinically indicated).

T cell number / function: Lymphocyte phenotyping, quantitative regulatory T cells, 
T cell function (PHA)

Chimerism testing as noted above.  



MRD (BM) by flow cytometry. Peripheral blood MRD (flow, DSMRD for ALL) may 
be sent at the discretion of the treating physician.
5.10.2 Pre-therapy clinic visit should be conducted within 14 days prior to the cycle start date.
5.10.3 On-therapy evaluations:

Weekly liver function and renal function tests while receiving azacitidine. If patients 
have tolerated two cycles of azacitidine without requirement for further intervention, 
complete blood count, liver and renal function tests may be performed every two 
weeks during their remaining cycles.

Bone marrow aspiration for MRD and chimerism as above every 2 cycles (or with 
each cycle if PB chimerism is 100% and BM chimerism remains mixed).
5.11
Schedule of correlative studies
5.11.1 T cell number and function with each cycle will be assessed while receiving 
azacitidine.
5.11.2 AML gene expression and mutation panel (AML-GEMP) will be assessed in those 
patients with a diagnosis of AML.  Samples from BM and PB will be collected at day 
+30, +90 and +180 (+/- 14 days) (see Appendix 4).  
Evaluation
Prior to 
enrollment
Prior to 
FWI/
SWI/ 
Day 28 (can 
be between 
Day 21 and 
Day 42
Prior to 
each 
azacitidine 
cycle
Weekly 
during 
azacitidine
3 and 6 
months post 
HCT 
(+/- 28 days)3
From 9 
months to 24 
months post-
HCT:
Every 3 
months 
(+/- 28 days)3
History and 
Physical 
(including GVHD 
assessment)
X
X
X
X
X
Routine labs1
X
X
X
X1
X
X
Peripheral Blood:
Chimerism and 
Minimal Residual 
Disease 
X
X
Bone Marrow: 
Chimerism and 
minimal residual 
disease 
X2
X2
X2
X2
T cell number / 
function
X
X3
Peripheral Blood: 
AML gene 
expression and 
mutation panel 
(AML-GEMP)
Optional
X
X
Bone marrow:
AML-GEMP
Optional
X
X
Table 2: Schedule of required investigations
1.
Routine labs to include Complete Blood Count with differential, and chemistry including 
serum creatinine, AST, ALT, bicarbonate and total bilirubin within 1 week prior to azacitidine 
administration. If a patient has tolerated two cycles of azacitidine without requirement for 


further intervention, complete blood count, liver and renal function tests may be performed 
every two weeks during their remaining cycles. 
2.
BM aspiration should be performed every other cycle (including day +30 and day +90).  
However, if patient is found to be FDC on peripheral blood sample, the next cycle that 
includes DLI cannot be initiated until BM chimerism is obtained and mixed BM chimerism is 
confirmed (unless DLI is indicated for (+) MRD). The following will be investigated with each 
BM exam (not including correlative samples):  Chimerism, morphology, MRD (by flow 
cytometry, and/or FISH, PCR, and/or deep sequencing (DS-MRD). Whenever possible, the 
most sensitive MRD technique should be used.  Correlative AML-GEMP will be collected and 
sent to the NIH on days +30, +90, and +180.
3.
If a 3-monthly time point coincides with a pre-cycle assessment, a separate 3-monthly 
assessment does not need to be completed.  However, bone marrow MRD/chimerism and 
AML-GEMP specimens, if applicable, must be included with the pre-cycle assessments.  If 
azacitidine cycles have been deferred, patients should undergo the required assessments 
including chimerism and lymphocyte quantification and function at least every 3 months.
5.12
Duration of study participation and follow-up
All patients will be followed as part of routine clinical care at a frequency of no less than every 
3 months for at least 2 years post-transplant.  All patients will have a thorough history and 
physical exam as well as laboratory monitoring for signs of GVHD as part of routine clinical 
care for the duration of the study (2 years post-transplant). 
6.0
Toxicity Management and Dose Modifications
6.1
DLI Toxicity:  GVHD

DLI will be GCSF-mobilized unless otherwise specified; DLI dose modifications may be 
made on a case-by-case basis.  See Appendix 3 for additional details regarding toxicity 
management. 

As soon as GVHD is suspected, all further DLI or withdrawal of immunosuppression 
should be stopped and the patient monitored, regardless of chimerism or MRD status. 

Azacitidine may continue at the discretion of the treating physician for grade I-II acute 
GVHD (aGVHD) or mild chronic GVHD (cGVHD).  

If aGVHD or cGVHD is confirmed, the patient should initiate therapy as per institutional 
standard of care. 

All instances of aGVHD or cGVHD in patients in the intervention group should be reported 
to the study chair within 10 days of learning about them, and grade III-IV aGVHD and 
severe cGVHD should be reported within 24 hours of learning about them (see Adverse 
Events Section 11.0).  

At each instance of grade III-IV aGVHD or cGVHD reported in the study, subgroup 
analysis will be performed in the high-risk group in order to monitor safety of DLI, as 
outlined in section 8.7.
6.2
Azacitidine Toxicity
Guidelines for adjusting azacitidine dose administration are based on the Common 
Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE version 4.0) applied to patient reports, 
history and physical, and laboratory evaluations performed each cycle.  Laboratory 
evaluations for toxicity will be performed the week prior to each cycle.  Dose adjustments are 
as follows (28):  
6.2.1
Development of drug-related grade 4 organ toxicity or severe infection:

Discontinuation of azacitidine
6.2.2
Hematologic toxicity:

Grade I-II toxicity: No dose adjustment is required.



For platelets <30,000/uL on a stable transfusion regimen, 50% dose reduction is 
recommended.

For platelets <15,000/uL, hold therapy until toxicity improves.

For neutrophils <750 not responsive to GCSF, 50% dose reduction is 
recommended.

For neutrophils <500 not responsive to GCSF, hold therapy until toxicity improves. 

See Appendix 5 for guidelines on subsequent dose adjustments based on nadir 
counts.
6.2.3
Renal toxicity

Grade I: No dose adjustment is required.

Grade II: Hold therapy until Grade II toxicity resolves.  Restart therapy at 50% dose 
reduction. If well-tolerated, full dose may be administered.
6.2.4
Hepatotoxicity

Grade I-II: No dose adjustment is required.

Grade III (AST/ALT >5x ULN): Hold therapy until Grade III toxicity resolves if 
clearly related to azacitidine administration.  Otherwise, consider 50% dose 
reduction and close monitoring.  
6.2.5
For other toxicities, repeat test twice weekly:

If abnormality resolves within 2 weeks, restart azacitidine at 50% dose reduction 
(20mg/m2) to complete 4 doses.  Proceed with DLI after 4th dose.

If abnormality does not resolve after 2 weeks, hold azacitidine but proceed with DLI 
if no signs / symptoms of GVHD.  Azacitidine 50% dose reduction should be used 
at start of next cycle even if lab abnormality returns to baseline. 
7.0
Criteria for Termination
7.1
Conditions for terminating the study:
The PI may terminate the study for any of the following reasons:
7.1.1
Significant toxicities are observed.
7.1.2
Stopping rules for interim toxicity and relapse futility are triggered as per Section 8.7.3.
7.1.3
It becomes clear that the study treatment is less effective than standard treatment.
7.1.4
All data have been collected.
7.2
Conditions for terminating individual patient participation in the study:
The PI may terminate the participation of an individual patient for any of the following reasons:
7.2.1
Withdrawal from the study by patient / parents or physician
7.2.2
Death
7.2.3
Leukemia relapse, defined as >5% leukemic blasts on bone marrow examination or 
more than 1% leukemic cells by immunoflow or FISH.  
7.2.4
Loss to follow-up or non-compliance with study procedures.
8.0
Statistical Considerations
8.1
Primary Efficacy endpoint definitions
8.1.1
Relapse rate
8.2
Secondary / Exploratory endpoints
8.2.1
Relapse-free survival
8.2.2
Median time to relapse


8.3
Primary Safety Endpoint Definitions
8.3.1
National Cancer Institute CTCAE version 4.0 grade 3 or higher renal, hepatic, cardiac, 
pulmonary, or neurologic toxicity; 
8.3.2
Grade III/IV acute GVHD or Severe/Extensive chronic GVHD 
8.3.3
Serious infection
8.3.4
Severe hematologic toxicity/ graft failure
8.3.5
>2 dose reductions for any reason.
8.4
Sample size
8.4.1
The sample size is estimated using Bayesian sequential monitoring design with toxicity 
and response outcomes as multiple endpoints(45). It is assumed that the rate of 
relapse in pediatric acute leukemia post-transplant would be 40% (as shown in our 
pilot study), azacitidine +/- DLI would reduce the 2-year relapse rate by approximately 
40% to a rate of 25%.  A sample size of 67 evaluable patients is required to provide 
80% power at a one-sided significance level of 0.05 to test the hypothesis based on 
the relapse rate of H0: relapse rate > 40% (historically-controlled) versus Ha: relapse 
rate < 25% (treatment-targeted).  The study will enroll patients until accrual of 67 
patients is achieved. 
8.4.2
Enrollment of 67 patients will be attainable with enrollment at multiple centers.  
Investigators from All Children’s Hospital, Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital have 
written letters of support expecting to enroll 30-40 patients over 2 years.  
8.5
Estimated Duration of the Study
8.5.1
67 patients are expected to enroll; enrollment over 2 years is anticipated.  Study 
intervention and data collection (2 years) are expected to be completed by 4 years.  
Preliminary safety analysis will be available within 1 year.
8.6
Statistical Analysis
8.6.1
Patient demographics and baseline characteristics including age, sex, race, ethnicity 
and medical conditions will be summarized using descriptive statistics.  
For 
quantitative parameters, descriptive statistics will include the mean, standard 
deviation, minimum, median and maximum.  For qualitative parameters, descriptive 
statistics will include the frequency and proportions. 
8.6.2
The primary endpoint parameters: (1) relapse rate and (2) incidence of Grade III-IV 
aGVHD, severe cGVHD, and Grade IV toxicities, will be estimated using proportions 
with 95% CI.
8.6.3
The chimerism parameters (CD3+, CD14/15+, CD19+, CD33+, CD34+) and incidence 
of acute and chronic GVHD will also be analyzed using descriptive statistics including 
means, standard deviation and 95% CI.
8.7
Interim analysis and stopping rules for safety and efficacy
8.7.1
As a phase II study with 67 evaluable patients, the study is designed to have interim 
stopping rules based on the safety/toxicity evaluation (including death and incidence of 
severe GVHD). See Section 11.0 for reporting SAEs associated with study stopping 
rules.
8.7.2
The occurrence of any serious adverse events (SAEs) will be reported to the 
Coordinating Trial Center within 24 hours of learning about them, and within 10 days in 
writing.  See Section 11.0 for SAE definitions and reporting requirements. A rate of 
SAEs of up to 20% is deemed acceptable in view of the potential benefit of the 
therapy. Accrual will stop if 3 patients with SAEs are observed in the first 3-6 patients 
undergoing the intervention, if 4 patients with SAEs are observed in the first 7-9 
patients undergoing the intervention, or if 5 patients with SAEs are observed in the first 
10-13 patients undergoing the intervention. The following table displays the minimum 


number of SAEs for the study to be stopped at each accrual period and the probability 
of early stopping at the assumed SAE rate.
8.7.3
Stopping rules for interim toxicity and relapse futility

Study data will be analyzed for relapse rates within 3 months for efficacy 
assessment. Such early futility assessment will be done when the first 14 patients 
have completed the 3-month follow-up in the study.  If there are 9 or more relapses 
out of 14 patients during the futility assessment, enrollment will be stopped due to 
futility. Otherwise an additional 54 patients will be accrued for a total of 67 patients 
in the study. By the end of the study, if there are 32 or more relapses observed, 
further investigation will not proceed.  In this study the rate of relapse in pediatric 
acute leukemia post-transplant is assumed to be 40% (as shown in our pilot study), 
azacitidine +/- DLI would reduce the 2-year relapse rate by approximately 40% to a 
rate of 25% and that the toxicity rate in pediatric acute leukemia post-transplant 
under azacitidine +/- DLI would be 20%.  The stopping rules for toxicity and relapse 
rate under sequential design of multiple endpoints are shown below:

For patients receiving DLI, a subset analysis of incidence of Grade III-IV aGVHD 
and mortality secondary to GVHD will be performed when a new patient is 
diagnosed with Grade III-IV GVHD or chronic GVHD.  
o
Reported rates of grade III-IV acute GVHD following DLI range from 20-
35%; GVHD-related mortality ranges from 5-15%.  
o
If rates of Grade III-IV aGVHD or GVHD-related mortality in this study 
exceed published rates, enrollment and further DLI administration will be 
suspended while further safety analysis is performed.  
9.0
Risks
9.1
Graft vs host disease

Patients undergoing withdrawal of immunosuppression or DLI are at higher risk of 
developing severe and potentially fatal GVHD. The risk of GVHD after withdrawal of 
immunosuppression and DLI is 50 – 65%, and the chance of dying from it is approximately 
10%.
Patients on Study
4-6
7-9
10-13
14-17
18-21
22-27
Number of patients 
with SAE
≥3
≥4
≥5
≥6
≥7
≥8
15%SAE 
1.2%-
4.2% 
1.1%-
2.8% 
0.9%-
2.7% 
0.9%-
2.4% 
0.9%-
2.0% 
0.8%-
2.6%
20%SAE 
2.6%-
8.2% 
2.9%-
6.6% 
2.6%-
6.9% 
3.2%-
6.8% 
3.5%-
6.6% 
3.6%-
8.2%
25%SAE 
4.7%-
13.2% 
5.8%-
11.7% 
5.8%-
12.6% 
7.3%-
12.8% 
8.2%-
12.7% 
8.9%-
14.2%
Patients on Study
<14
15-21
22-28
29-35
36-42
43-49
50-56
57-63
Number of patients with 
SAE (Toxicity)
>8
≥10
≥13
≥16
≥18
≥21
≥23
≥26
Number of patients with 
relapse in 3 months
>9
≥13
≥16
≥19
≥23
≥26
≥29
≥32


9.2
Azacitidine risks
Primary risks of azacitidine are complications associated with hematologic toxicity such as 
bleeding and infection.  At the dose proposed in this study, the risk of Grade III hematologic 
toxicity is low (<10%).  Dose reduction will be used as described above for any undue toxicity 
encountered.  A comprehensive list of side effects that have been reported with azacitidine 
(including cases in which the drug is given at a higher dose) is provided below:
9.2.1
Common side effects (>10%):

Cardiovascular: Peripheral edema (7% to 19%), chest pain (16%), pallor (16%), 
pitting edema (15%)

Central nervous system: Fever (30% to 52%), fatigue (13% to 36%), headache 
(22%), dizziness (19%), anxiety (5% to 13%), depression (12%), insomnia (9% to 
11%), malaise (11%), pain (11%)

Dermatologic: Bruising (19% to 31%), petechiae (11% to 24%), erythema (7% to 
17%), skin lesion (15%), rash (10% to 14%), pruritus (12%)

Endocrine & metabolic: Hypokalemia (6% to 13%)

Gastrointestinal: Nausea (48% to 71%), vomiting (27% to 54%), diarrhea (36%), 
constipation (34% to 50%), anorexia (13% to 21%), weight loss (16%), abdominal 
pain (11% to 16%), abdominal tenderness (12%)

Hematologic: Thrombocytopenia (66% to 70%; grades 3/4: 58%), anemia (51% 
to 70%; grades 3/4: 14%), neutropenia (32% to 66%; grades 3/4: 61%), 
leukopenia (18% to 48%; grades 3/4: 15%), febrile neutropenia (14% to 16%; 
grades 3/4: 13%), myelosuppression (nadir: days 10-17; recovery: days 28-31)

Local: Injection site reactions (14% to 29%): Erythema (35% to 43%; more 
common with I.V. administration), pain (19% to 23%; more common with I.V. 
administration), bruising (5% to 14%)

Neuromuscular & skeletal: Weakness (29%), rigors (26%), arthralgia (22%), limb 
pain (20%), back pain (19%), myalgia (16%)

Respiratory: Cough (11% to 30%), dyspnea (5% to 29%), pharyngitis (20%), 
epistaxis (16%), nasopharyngitis (15%), upper respiratory tract infection (9% to 
13%), pneumonia (11%), crackles (11%)

Miscellaneous: Diaphoresis (11%)
9.2.2
Less common:

Cardiovascular: Cardiac murmur (10%), hypertension (≤9%), tachycardia (9%), 
hypotension (7%), syncope (6%), chest wall pain (5%)

Central nervous system: Lethargy (7% to 8%), hypoesthesia (5%), post-
procedural pain (5%)

Dermatologic: Cellulitis (8%), urticaria (6%), dry skin (5%), skin nodule (5%)

Gastrointestinal: Gingival bleeding (10%), oral mucosal petechiae (8%), stomatitis 
(8%), weight loss (≤8%), dyspepsia (6% to 7%), hemorrhoids (7%), abdominal 
distension (6%), loose stools (6%), dysphagia (5%), oral hemorrhage (5%), 
tongue ulceration (5%)

Genitourinary: Dysuria (8%), urinary tract infection (8% to 9%)

Hematologic: Hematoma (9%), post procedural hemorrhage (6%)

Local: Injection site reactions: Pruritus (7%), hematoma (6%), rash (6%), 
granuloma (5%), induration (5%), pigmentation change (5%), swelling (5%)

Neuromuscular & skeletal: Muscle cramps (6%)

Renal: Hematuria (≤6%)

Respiratory: Rhinorrhea (10%), rales (9%), wheezing (9%), breath sounds 
decreased (8%), pharyngolaryngeal pain (6%), pleural effusion (6%), postnasal 
drip (6%), rhinitis (6%), rhonchi (6%), nasal congestion (6%), atelectasis (5%), 
sinusitis (5%)



Miscellaneous: Lymphadenopathy (10%), herpes simplex (9%), night sweats 
(9%), transfusion reaction (7%), mouth hemorrhage (5%)
9.2.3   Rare side effects and/or case reports: 
Abscess (limb, perirectal), acute febrile neutrophilic dermatosis (Sweet’s syndrome), 
agranulocytosis, anaphylactic shock, atrial fibrillation, azotemia, blastomycosis, bone 
marrow depression/failure, bone pain aggravated, cardiac failure, cardiorespiratory 
arrest, 
catheter 
site 
hemorrhage, 
cellulitis, 
cerebral 
hemorrhage, 
CHF, 
cholecystectomy, cholecystitis, congestive cardiomyopathy, dehydration, diverticulitis, 
eye hemorrhage, fibrosis (interstitial and alveolar), gastrointestinal hemorrhage, 
glycosuria, hemoptysis, hepatic coma, hypersensitivity reaction, hypophosphatemia, 
infection (bacterial), injection site infection, injection site necrosis, interstitial lung 
disease, intracranial hemorrhage, leukemia cutis, reversible liver injury, lung 
infiltration, melena, neutropenic sepsis, orthostatic hypotension, pancytopenia, 
pneumonitis, polyuria, pyoderma gangrenosum, renal failure, renal tubular acidosis, 
seizure, respiratory distress, sepsis, septic shock, serum bicarbonate levels 
decreased, serum creatinine increased, splenomegaly, systemic inflammatory 
response syndrome, toxoplasmosis, tumor lysis syndrome, veno-occlusive disease of 
the liver.
9.3
Risk of extramedullary relapse or late relapse
Patients undergoing immunomodulatory therapy after transplant may develop extramedullary 
leukemia relapse despite prevention of bone marrow disease. Although their overall risk of 
relapse will not be increased by using immunomodulatory therapy, it is possible that this 
therapy will increase the tendency to relapse outside of bone marrow.  In addition, previous 
studies have shown that patients undergoing immunotherapy may relapse later than usual 
(24-36 months post-transplant).  While this therapy does not increase the risk of relapse 
overall, it is possible that immunotherapy only delays relapse in some patients.
9.4
Chimerism testing risks
9.4.1
Bone marrow aspiration
Patients will have BM exams every other cycle or about every 3 months after 
transplant.  It is estimated that up to 6 bone marrow exams may be required in some 
patients. All bone marrow exams in children are done under general anesthesia, which 
carries a small risk (1:10,000- 1:30,000) of adverse event due to anesthesia, including 
death. There is universal but minor risk of local tenderness at the site of bone marrow 
exam, and a small risk (<1:100) of infection of the bone marrow exam site. Bone 
marrow biopsies are not required in this study; however, sometimes a treating 
physician may request a bone marrow biopsy in addition to aspirate.
9.4.2
Blood loss due to chimerism testing
Eight ml of blood or bone marrow will be obtained with each chimerism testing (3 – 12 
times over the period of one year). This amount of blood is easily replaced by bone 
marrow production, even in a post-transplant patient. The blood will be obtained 
through the central line (Broviac) or with other routine blood tests.
9.5
Risk of overtreatment
In a previous analysis, approximately 30% of patients with mixed chimerism did not develop 
leukemia relapse, despite mixed chimerism. Unfortunately, those patients cannot be 
distinguished from 70% of patients who will relapse.  In a more recent subset of high-risk 
MRD(+) patients, 7 out of 11 high-risk patients had mixed chimerism (and thus would be 
treated with azacitidine plus DLI on this protocol), and of those 7, 5 relapsed.  Thus 2 of 7 
would be “over-treated” (although these patients also received some degree of 
immunotherapy that may have helped prevent relapse).  Patients “over-treated” on this study 
may be at an increased risk of developing GVHD.  These patients are expected to represent a 


very small minority of patients on this study, as patients with negative MRD (Standard-Risk) 
will not receive DLI.  
10.0
Data and Safety Monitoring Plan
10.1
Oversight and monitoring plan
The UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center (UCSF-HDFCCC) Data and 
Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) is responsible for monitoring data quality and patient 
safety for all UCSF-HDFCCC institutional clinical studies (see Appendix 19.6).  A summary 
of DSMC activities for this study includes: 

Review of subject enrollment 

Review of all serious adverse events (See section 11.0) 

Monitoring every six months (depending on study accrual)

Minimum of a yearly audit
10.2
Monitoring and reporting guidelines
Investigators will conduct continuous review of data and patient safety at weekly meetings 
where the results of each patient’s treatment are discussed and documented in the minutes. 
The discussion will include the number of patients, significant toxicities as described in the 
protocol, doses adjustments, and observed responses. All grade 3-5 AE’s and SAE’s will be 
entered in the HDFCCC Clinical Trials Management System.  All institutional Phase 2 studies 
are designated with a moderate risk assessment; therefore, the data is monitored every six 
months, with twenty percent of the subjects monitored (or at least three subjects if the 
calculated value is less than three). 
10.3
Regulatory considerations
This study will be reviewed by the UCSF–HDFCCC Protocol Review Committee, in addition to 
the UCSF IRB (the Committee on Human Research, or CHR).  Participating sites will submit 
this study to the relevant local IRB for review.  
10.4
Independent ethics committees / Institutional Review Board
This protocol and the informed consent will be approved by the IRB at all sites. The Principal 
Investigator at each site is responsible for keeping the IRB advised of the progress of the 
study and of any changes made in the protocol prior to implementation. The Principal 
Investigator will also keep the IRB informed of any significant adverse reactions (see section 
11.0), and any protocol exceptions or deviations. Records of all study review and approval 
documents must be kept on file by the Principal Investigator and are subject to FDA inspection 
during or after completion of the study. The IRB at all sites will receive notification of the 
termination of the study.  
11.0
Adverse Events
11.1
Grading adverse events and serious adverse events
This study will use the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 
(CTCAE v 4.0) found at the following website: http://evs.nci.nih.gov/ftp1/CTCAE/About.html 
for grading the severity of adverse events.  The investigator is responsible for making an 
assessment of whether or not it is reasonable to suspect a causal relationship between the 
adverse event and the study treatment. 
11.2
 Adverse Event Review and Monitoring 
The investigator or qualified designee will assess each subject to evaluate for potential new 
or worsening AEs as per the study schedule, and more frequently if clinically indicated.  
Adverse experiences will be graded and recorded throughout the study and during the follow-


up period.  Toxicities will be characterized in terms regarding seriousness, causality, toxicity 
grading, and action taken with regard to trial treatment. 
11.3
Definition of Adverse Event
An adverse event (also known as an adverse experience) is defined as any untoward 
medical occurrence associated with the use of the study intervention in humans, whether or 
not considered drug related.  More specifically, an adverse event can be any unfavorable and 
unintended sign (e.g., an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally 
associated with the study intervention, without any judgment about causality.  An adverse 
event can arise from any use of the study intervention (e.g., off-label use, use in combination 
with another treatment) and from any route of administration, formulation, or dose, including 
an overdose. 
11.4
Adverse reaction 
An adverse reaction is defined as any adverse event caused by the study intervention.  
Adverse reactions are a subset of all suspected adverse reactions for which there is reason 
to conclude that the study intervention caused the event.
11.6
Suspected 
A suspected adverse reaction is defined as any adverse event for which there is a 
reasonable possibility that the study intervention caused the adverse event. For the purposes 
of safety reporting, “reasonable possibility” indicates that there is evidence to suggest a 
causal relationship between the study intervention and the adverse event.  A suspected 
adverse reaction implies a lesser degree of certainty about causality than an adverse 
reaction.
11.7 Unexpected 
An adverse event or suspected adverse reaction is considered unexpected if it is not listed in 
the investigator brochure or package insert(s), or is not listed at the specificity or severity that 
has been observed, or, if an investigator brochure is not required or available, is not 
consistent with the risk information described in the general investigational plan or elsewhere 
in the current application. 
“Unexpected,” as used in this definition, also refers to adverse events or suspected adverse 
reactions that are mentioned in the investigator brochure as occurring with a class of drugs or 
as anticipated from the pharmacological properties of the drug, but are not specifically 
mentioned as occurring with the particular drug or study intervention under investigation.
11.7 Serious
An adverse event or suspected adverse reaction is considered serious if, in the view of the 
study PI it results in any of the following outcomes: 

Death

Life-threatening adverse event

Inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization

A persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to conduct 
normal life function

Congenital anomaly/birth defect
Important medical events that may not result in death, but are life-threatening or require 
hospitalization, may be considered serious when, based upon appropriate medical judgment, 
they may jeopardize the patient or subject and may require medical or surgical intervention to 
prevent one of the outcomes listed in this definition.  Examples of such medical events 
include allergic bronchospasm requiring intensive treatment in an emergency room or at 
home, blood dyscrasias or convulsions that do not result in inpatient hospitalization, or the 
development of drug dependency or drug abuse.


11.8 Life-threatening
An adverse event or suspected adverse reaction is considered life-threatening if, in the view 
of the study PI, its occurrence places the patient or subject at immediate risk of death. It does 
not include an adverse event or suspected adverse reaction that, had it occurred in a more 
severe form, might have caused death. 
11.9 Evaluation of an Adverse Event
All grade 3 and above adverse events will be entered into OnCore®, whether or not the event 
is believed to be associated with use of the study drug.  
The Investigator will assign attribution of the possible association of the event with use of the 
investigational drug, and this information will be entered into OnCore® using the classification 
system listed below: 
Relationship 
Attribution 
Description 
Unrelated
The AE is clearly NOT related to the 
intervention 
Unrelated to investigational 
drug/intervention
Unlikely
The AE is doubtfully related to the intervention 
Possible
The AE may be related to the intervention 
Probable
The AE is likely related to the intervention 
Related to investigational 
drug/intervention
Definite
The AE is clearly related to the intervention 
Signs or symptoms reported as adverse events will be graded and recorded by the 
Investigator according to the CTCAE.  When specific adverse events are not listed in the 
CTCAE they will be graded by the Investigator as none, mild, moderate or severe according 
to the following grades and definitions:
Grade 0
No AE (or within normal limits)
Grade 1
Mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; 
intervention not indicated
Grade 2
Moderate; minimal, local, or noninvasive intervention (e.g., packing, cautery) 
indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL)
Grade 3:
Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization 
or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self-care ADL
Grade 4:
Life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated
Grade 5:
Death related to AE
11.10  NCI Common Terminology for Adverse Events (CTCAE) 
An investigator who is a qualified physician will evaluate all adverse events according to the 
NCI Common Terminology for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0. Any adverse event 
which changes CTCAE grade over the course of a given episode will have each change of 
grade recorded as per study requirements.
All adverse events regardless of CTCAE grade must also be evaluated for seriousness.
11.11 Follow-up of Adverse Events
All adverse events will be followed with appropriate medical management until resolved.  
Patients removed from study for unacceptable adverse events will be followed for 90 days or 
until resolution or stabilization of the adverse event.  For selected adverse events for which 
administration of the investigational treatment was stopped, a re-challenge of the subject with 
the investigational treatment may be conducted if considered both safe and ethical by the 


Investigator.
11.12 Adverse Events Reporting 
The Study Chair will assess all adverse events and determine reportability requirements to the 
UCSF Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) and UCSF’s Institutional Review 
Board, and the Committee on Human Research (CHR).  Adverse events will be reported to 
the DSMC via OnCore.®
All adverse events entered into OnCore® will be reviewed by the Helen Diller Family 
Comprehensive Cancer Center Site Committee on a monthly basis.  The Site Committee will 
review and discuss monthly the selected toxicity, the toxicity grade, and the attribution of 
relationship of the adverse event to the administration of the study treatment.
All grade(s) 3-5 adverse events entered into OnCore® will be reviewed on a monthly basis at 
the Site Committee meetings. The Site Committee will review and discuss the selected 
toxicity, the toxicity grade, and the attribution of relationship of the adverse event to the 
administration of the study treatment.
In addition, all suspected adverse reactions considered “serious” entered into OnCore®, will 
be reviewed and monitored by the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee on an ongoing 
basis and discussed at DSMC meetings, which take place every six weeks.
Adverse event reporting will continue until 24 months post-transplant, or until 90 days after the 
patient stops trial participation, if applicable.
11.14 Expedited Reporting 
The following adverse events, when they occur in patients undergoing withdrawal of 
immunosuppression or DLI, must be reported to the Study Chair within 10 days of occurrence: 

Any evidence of acute or chronic GVHD toxicities of any organ of Grade III or higher 
(using CTCAE v. 4.0) 

Any change in GVHD prophylaxis or conditioning regimen outside of the planned 
GVHD prophylaxis taper.

Any invasive fungal infection or disease caused by viral infections in patients treated 
with immunosuppression for GVHD that developed following study intervention

Inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization

Relapse of leukemia/malignancy.
Reporting to the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee
If a death occurs during the treatment phase of the study or within 30 days after the last 
administration of the study treatment and it is determined to be related either to the study 
drug(s) or to a study procedure, the Investigator or his/her designee must notify Study Chair 
within one business day of knowledge of the event, who must then notify the DSMC Chair (or 
qualified alternate) within 1 business day.  The contact may be by phone or e-mail.
Reporting Committee on Human Research (Institutional Review Board)
The Study Chair must report events meeting the UCSF CHR definition of “Unanticipated 
Problem” (UP) within 10 business days of his/her awareness of the event.  Participating site 
Principal Investigators must report events to their IRB as per institutional guidelines.
Reporting Requirements for participating sites:
Any adverse event meeting SAE criteria must be reported to UCSF within 24 hours of the site 
learning about the event. 

SAEs must be reported to UCSF PI via the SAE Case Report Form:



SAEs and Safety Reports will be submitted to IRBs as per local requirements.  
11.15 Review of adverse event rates
If the study has an increase of unexpected or expected Severe Adverse Events above the rate 
reported in this protocol, the increased rate of AEs will be reported to the DSMC at the time of 
identification. The DSMC Chair and Study Chair will discuss the findings and proceed with a 
written course of action. If at any time the Study Chair stops enrollment or stops the study due 
to safety issues the DSMC Chair must be notified within 24 business hours via e-mail. The 
DSMC must receive a formal letter within 10 business days and the IRB must be notified.
If any of the above action occurs in multiple-institutional clinical trial, the Study Coordinator will 
insure that all participating sites are notified.
11.16 SAE Reports Associated with Study Stopping Rules
The following SAEs have a potential to trigger study stopping rules (see Section 8.7) and must 
be reported to the Study Chair within 24 hours:
11.16.1
aGVHD of grade IV 
11.16.2
Severe cGVHD 
11.16.3
Any organ toxicity of grade IV (using CTC Common Toxicity criteria version v4.0) 
that is judged to be related to withdrawal of immunosuppression, azacitidine, or 
DLI.
11.16.4
Any death judged to be related to fast immunosuppression withdrawal, 
azacitidine, or DLI.
11.16.5
Note: investigators must report any aGVHD grade IV, severe cGVHD, any organ 
grade IV toxicity or any death in patients undergoing immunosuppression 
withdrawal to the Study Chair within 24 hours. Judgment about contribution of 
withdrawal of immunosuppression to the reported severe event will be made by 
DSMC within 10 days.
11.16.6
Phone or fax reports of SAE’s due within 24 hours to:
11.17 DSMC review of treatment toxicity
Judgment about contribution of withdrawal of azacitidine +/- DLI to toxicity will be made by the 
DSMC and based on: 
11.4.1
Temporal relationship of the event to the study drug; 
11.4.2
Whether an alternative etiology has been identified;
11.4.3
Biological plausibility.
11.18 Classification of GVHD
To be classified as severe cGVHD, a minimum of 3 organs should be involved with stage 2 
disease, or 2 organs with stage 3 disease. Please see Appendix 2 for a list of symptoms and 
staging. (For example: skin: 10 – 50% skin rash; Joint: mild joint contractures; and esophagus: 
dysphagia or odynophagia requiring dietary changes would qualify for severe cGVHD. Multiple 
symptoms within the same organ system should not be counted.  Rash, sclerodermatous 
changes and dry flaky skin would all count as 1 organ/system involvement).


11.19 Hematopoietic toxicity: 
11.4.4
Grade 3: ANC >500/microliter but < 1000/microliter for a duration of > 4 weeks.  
Platelets < 50,000/microliter but > 20,000/microliter for a duration of > 4 weeks. 
11.4.5
Grade 4: neutrophils <500/microliter and/or platelets <20,000/microliter for a duration 
of > 4 weeks. 
11.4.6
Grade 5: death due to bacterial or fungal infection or hemorrhage associated with 
hematopoietic toxicity.
12.0
Benefits
Treatment on this protocol may decrease the risk of leukemia relapse.
13.0
Alternatives
13.1
Not undergoing careful chimerism monitoring. 
13.2
Not receiving azacitidine as prophylactic post-transplant therapy.
13.3
Performing chimerism testing and donor lymphocyte infusion off-study.
14.0
Cost
14.1
The patient will be responsible for the cost of all clinical procedures. Post-transplant 
azacitidine and immunomodulatory therapy with DLI have been shown to be effective to 
prevent leukemia relapse in the post-transplant setting; third party payers have usually 
covered these costs. The frequency of bone marrow testing and DLI may be increased for 
some patients, based on risk factors for relapse.
15.0
Record Keeping and Record Retention
The Principal Investigator at each site is required to maintain adequate records of the disposition of 
the study treatment, including dates, quantity, and use by subjects.  The Principal Investigator is 
required to prepare and maintain adequate and accurate case histories that record all observations 
and other data pertinent to the investigation on each individual administered the study treatment. 
Case histories include the case report forms and supporting data (e.g., signed and dated consent 
forms and medical records, such as progress notes of the physician, the individual's hospital chart(s), 
and the nurses' notes. The case history for each individual shall document that informed consent was 
obtained prior to participation in the study.  Study documentation includes all CRFs, data correction 
forms or queries, source documents, Sponsor-Investigator correspondence, monitoring logs/letters, 
and regulatory documents (e.g., protocol and amendments, CHR correspondence and approval, 
signed patient consent forms).
Source documents include all recordings of observations or notations of clinical activities and all 
reports and records necessary for the evaluation and reconstruction of the clinical research study.
In accordance with FDA regulations and if applicable to the study intervention, the investigator shall 
retain records for a period of 2 years following the date a marketing application is approved for the 
drug for the indication for which it is being investigated; or, if no application is to be filed or if the 
application is not approved for such indication, until 2 years after the investigation is discontinued and 
FDA is notified.
16.0
Coordinating Center Documentation of Distribution 
It is the responsibility of the Study Chair to maintain adequate files documenting the distribution of 
study documents as well as their receipt (when possible).  The HDFCCC recommends that the Study 
Chair maintain a correspondence file and log for each segment of distribution (e.g., participating sites, 
etc.):

Correspondence file: should contain copies (paper or electronic) of all protocol versions, 
cover letters, amendment outlines (summary of changes), etc., along with distribution 
documentation and (when available) documentation of receipt.



Correspondence log: should be a brief list of all documents distributed including the date 
sent, recipient(s), and (if available) a tracking number and date received.

At a minimum, the Study Chair must keep documentation of when and to whom the protocol, 
its updates and safety information are distributed.
17.0
Multicenter communication
The UCSF Coordinating Center provides administration, data management, and organizational 
support for the participating sites in the conduct of a multicenter clinical trial.  The Coordinating Trial 
Center will also coordinate conference calls with participating sites at the completion of each cohort or 
more frequently as needed to discuss risk assessment.  The following issues will be discussed as 
appropriate: 

Enrollment information

Adverse events (i.e. new adverse events and updates on unresolved adverse events and 
new safety information)

Protocol violations

Other issues affecting the conduct of the study

Record Keeping and record retention
18.0
Protection of Human Subjects
Prior to implementing this protocol at UCSF, the protocol, informed consent form, HIPAA 
authorization and any other information pertaining to participants must be approved by the UCSF 
Committee on Human Research (CHR). Prior to implementing this protocol at the participating sites, 
each site must obtain IRB approval for the UCSF CHR approved protocol. The following documents 
must be provided to UCSF before the participating site can be initiated and begin enrolling 
participants: 

Participating Site IRB approval(s) for the protocol, appendices, informed consent form and 
HIPAA authorization 

Participating Site IRB approved consent form 

Participating Site IRB membership list 

Participating Site IRB’s Federal Wide Assurance number and OHRP Registration number 

Curriculum vitae and medical license for each investigator and consenting professional 

Documentation of Human Subject Research Certification training for investigators and key 
staff members at the Participating Site 

Participating site laboratory certifications and normal reference ranges 
UCSF will also request that all sub-sites send their Data Safety and Monitoring Plan (DSMP) to UCSF 
for review for approval. If a sub-site does not have its own DSMP in place, UCSF will at that time 
review the resources necessary to include that sub-site and determine whether the UCSF study 
personnel are able to manage the regulatory burden for that sub-site. Upon receipt of the required 
documents, UCSF will formally contact the site and grant permission to proceed with enrollment. 
18.1
Protection from Unnecessary Harm 
Each clinical site is responsible for protecting all subjects involved in human experimentation. This is 
accomplished through the CHR mechanism and the process of informed consent. The CHR reviews 
all proposed studies involving human experimentation and ensures that the subject’s rights and 
welfare are protected and that the potential benefits and/or the importance of the knowledge to be 
gained outweigh the risks to the individual. The CHR also reviews the informed consent document 
associated with each study in order to ensure that the consent document accurately and clearly 
communicates the nature of the research to be done and its associated risks and benefits. 
18.2
Protection of Privacy
Patients will be informed of the extent to which their confidential health information generated from 
this study may be used for research purposes. Following this discussion, they will be asked to sign 
the HIPAA form and informed consent documents. The original signed document will become part of 


the patient’s medical records, and each patient will receive a copy of the signed document. The use 
and disclosure of protected health information will be limited to the individuals described in the 
informed consent document.


19.1
Appendix 1: Chimerism analysis 
Chimerism will be determined using a semi-quantitative PCR-based method involving amplification of 
genes containing short tandem repeats. For each donor-recipient pair, informative alleles will be 
determined with a panel of short tandem repeat loci (VWF, D21S11, D18S51, D16S539, PENTA D, 
D3S1358, FGA, D7S820, D2S1338, D10S2325, D12S391, SE33, PENTA E). If multiple loci were 
informative, two loci will be selected for post-transplant testing for each donor-recipient pair. 
Peripheral blood mononuclear cells will be prepared for all patients using a Ficoll-Hypaque gradient. 
Cell subsets will be isolated using Miltenyi magnetic particles (
, 
) to select for desired subset from the peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Purity will be 
determined for every subset. In order to consider the result valid, the purity of the subset should be 
≥90%. For peripheral blood specimens cells will be selected based upon CD3+, CD14/15+ and 
CD19+ expression. For BM specimens, CD33+ and CD34+ subsets will also be analyzed. The DNA 
will be isolated from all specimens using spin columns containing a silica gel membrane (
 
). The size of the amplified fragments will be determined using an automated 
nucleotide sequencer (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) and the quantity for each PCR 
product will be determined using peak areas. Sensitivity controls consisting of mixtures containing 
donor DNA mixed with recipient DNA are included in every assay. For most donor-recipient pairs, the 
level of sensitivity for detecting donor cells is ≥1%, depending upon the relative efficiency of 
amplification and detection of donor alleles. During validation, inter-assay variation was ±1% when 
the minority population represented 1-5% of specimen; inter-assay variation was ±3% when the 
minority population represented 6-10% of specimen; and inter-assay variation was 6% when the 
minority population represented ≥ 11% of the specimen. 
In this study the goal will be to achieve 100% donor cells in all subsets.


19.2
Appendix 2: Assessment of Chronic GVHD




19.3
Appendix 3: Use of Donor Lymphocyte Infusions or Hematopoietic Progenitor Cell Boosts 
after Hematopoietic Progenitor Cell Transplant (HSCT)
1.0
Objective:
1.1
To provide guidelines for use of Donor Lymphocyte Infusions (DLI) and hematopoietic progenitor 
cell boosts after transplant for patients in whom DLI is not performed on an investigational study.
2.0
Scope:
2.1
PBMT attending physicians, fellows, nurse specialists, and PBMT laboratory staff.
3.0
Materials/Equipment:
None
4.0
Definitions:
4.1
"Additional donor cells": Donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) and/or hematopoietic 
progenitor cell boost.
4.2
aGvHD: Acute graft vs. host disease
4.3
DLI: Donor lymphocyte infusion: Infusion of additional donor's cells into bone marrow transplant 
recipients with the goal to enhance graft-versus-leukemia effect or speed up immune 
reconstitution in recipients of T-cell depleted (TCD) transplants.
4.4
Therapeutic DLI – DLI used for the treatment of relapse (in malignancies) or treatment of 
infection (in malignancies or non-malignant disorders).
4.5
Prophylactic DLI – DLI used in a setting of mixed chimerism and without documentation of 
disease relapse (in malignancies), or used in order to enhance immune reconstitution (usually in 
T-cell depleted transplants).
4.4
Hematopoietic progenitor cell boost: Additional infusion of progenitor cells (autologous or 
allogeneic) in order to enhance engraftment in patients who are cytokine or transfusion 
dependent post transplant.
4.5
PBMT: Pediatric bone marrow transplant
4.6
TCD: T-cell depleted
5.0  Procedure:
5.1
Indications for DLI in leukemia patients:
5.1.1
A patient may undergo post-transplant DLI if:
Patient with malignancy has evidence of increasing host chimerism (defined as increase in 
host chimerism that is outside of laboratory error, obtained in the absence of acute infection 
), OR a patient has stable mixed chimerism that has not converted to full donor chimerism 
4-8 weeks following discontinuation of immunosuppression, OR DLI can be given at any 
time post transplant if a patient has leukemia relapse post transplant measured by 
molecular, cytogenetic, immunoflow or bone marrow morphology findings. The amount of 
leukemic cells in the bone marrow should not exceed 5%. Patients with full donor 
chimerism who are at a very high risk of relapse (positive MRD prior to transplant, previous 
relapse after transplant, primary induction failure) may require DLI to speed up immune 
reconstitution post transplant and prevent relapse AND:
Implementation date:  
Obsolete date: _________
Review dates: 
-new 
Revision dates: 


5.1.2
There is no evidence of active GvHD in a patient who is off GvHD prophylaxis and there 
is no history of acute GVHD of grade >II, AND:
5.1.3
Patient/family has understood risks and benefits of the procedure as outlined in 
main transplant consent..
5.1.4.   Patients with a history of peri-engraftment syndrome or acute GVHD may be at a higher 
risk for GVHD following DLI than patients who never had peri-engraftment syndrome or 
GVHD and caution should be taken with using DLI in these patients.
5.2.
Indications for DLI in patients undergoing TCD transplants:
5.2.1
At 90 days post transplant, there is evidence of engraftment but the absolute CD4 count 
is <100/microliter, or any time post-transplant if a patient has an infection (CMV, EBV, 
etc.) that has not responded to an appropriate trial of standard therapy (such as 
antivirals or Rituximab) AND:
5.2.2
There is no active GvHD or history of Grade II-IV, AND:
5.2.3 Patient/family has understood risks and benefits of the procedure as outlined in main 
transplant consent.
5.3.
Indications for progenitor cell boost:
5.3.1.   Progenitor cell boost is typically used in autologous transplant recipients or in TCD 
depleted transplant recipients. Rarely, progenitor cell boost shall be required, or available 
in allogeneic non-modified transplants.  If, at 3 months post transplant, the patient has 
engrafted, but requires cytokines in order to keep ANC >500, or if patient requires platelet 
(PLT) transfusions in order to keep PLT >20,000 and packed red blood cells (PRBC) 
transfusions in order to keep hemoglobin >7 g/dl, and alloimmunization has been ruled out, 
additional infusion of stem cells, if available, may be done.
5.4
Frequency of chimerism testing and evaluation before and after giving additional donor's cells:
5.4.1
In patients with leukemia peripheral blood engraftment studies should be obtained at day 
30 post transplant and then repeated monthly until full donor chimerism is achieved. Once 
full donor chimerism is confirmed, testing should be done every 3 months until 3 years post 
transplant. In patients with acute or cGVHD, chimerism should be obtained annually, or as 
clinically indicated.  More sensitive testing for leukemia, such as deep sequencing 
(ClonoSight) may replace some or all chimerism tests.
In patients with non-malignancies, if not dictated by the protocol, engraftment should be 
obtained monthly until 1 year post transplant if there is evidence of ”unstable” mixed 
chimerism (defined as whole blood chimerism <70% and/or CD3+ chimerism <50%), and  
every 3 months  if mixed chimerism is stable (documented by at least 2 monthly tests).
During the second year post transplant chimerism will be tested every 3 months in patients 
with unstable chimerism and every 6 months in patients with stable chimerism. After that 
chimerism will be tested as clinically indicated.
5.4.2
In patients with leukemia, bone marrow examination should be done at approximately Day 
30. Bone marrow should be evaluated for the presence of residual leukemia by the most 
sensitive and specific test available. Engraftment studies from the bone marrow should be 
obtained as well.
5.4.3. A donor shall undergo an infectious disease evaluation within 7 days of each allogeneic DLI 
donation (30 days for European donors) as outlined in CL 200: Autologous/Allogeneic Donor 
Evaluation.
5.4.4
A recipient shall be evaluated clinically and by performing liver function tests for infection 
and evidence of GVHD prior to each infusion of additional donor cells. If there is suspicion 
of infection, further work-up shall be done by ordering an appropriate infectious disease 
antigen tests. Infection is not an absolute contraindication for additional donor cells; in 
some instances an infection can be treated by the infusion of additional donor T-cells.
5.4.5
Patients who undergo additional donor cell infusions should be followed in the BMT clinic 
for evidence of GvHD. The frequency of visits may vary from once a week to once every 
3 months, depending on patient's condition.


5.5.
Timing of additional donor cell infusions:
5.5.1. Prophylactic DLI in patients with leukemia: please see SOP CL 246: Strategies for the 
Reduction of Relapse Risk in Patients With Acute Leukemias Undergoing Allogeneic 
Blood and Marrow Transplantation.
5.5.2. Prophylactic DLI after TCD transplants:
5.5.2.1 Prophylactic DLI can be given in patients undergoing TCD transplants if the 
absolute CD4 count is <100/microliter at 90 days post transplant. DLI can be 
repeated at 4-8 week intervals until the CD4+ count is >100/microliter as long as 
there is no evidence of aGvHD.
5.5.3.
Therapeutic DLI in patients with leukemia:
DLI can be given at any time post-transplant if there is cytogenetic or molecular evidence 
of relapse (bone marrow <5% blasts), patient is off immunosuppression and there is no 
evidence of active GVHD .
5.5.4
Therapeutic DLI for treatment of infections:
DLI can be used for treatment of infections. DLI are used only if the patient has not 
responded to appropriate anti-microbial therapy and if specific T-cells cannot be obtained. 
In order to receive DLI the patient should not, have active GVHD,. or history of GVHD of 
≥grade II.
5.5.5. Progenitor cell boost in autologous transplants:
5.5.3.1 Additional cells can be given any time past day +28 in autologous transplant 
recipients.
5.6
Sources of additional donor cells:
5.6.1
If a donor is undergoing a peripheral blood progenitor cell collection, all cells remaining 
after transplant may be stored for future DLI or progenitor cell boosts. These cells are G-
CSF mobilized. In TCD transplants after G- CSF mobilized progenitor cell collection, T-cells 
are separated and stored for future DLI, and CD34+ enriched cells are saved for progenitor 
cell boost. Less commonly, additional progenitor cells are available after the allogeneic 
bone marrow transplant. If available, additional bone marrow may be stored for future 
progenitor cell boost. T-cells may be obtained by apheresis or peripheral blood draw.
5.7.
Cell dose for DLI and progenitor cell boost:
DLI dose depends on purpose of DLI (therapeutic vs. prophylactic), donor match, and whether cells 
were obtained following G-CSF mobilization.
5.7.1. CD3+ cell dose used for prophylactic DLI in fully matched related transplants, if progenitor 
cells were obtained with G-CSF mobilization:
1st DLI – 5 x 106/kg of recipient's weight 
2nd DLI – 1 x 107/kg of recipient's weight 
3rd DLI – 5 x 107/kg of recipient’s weight 
4th DLI – 1 x 108/kg of recipient’s weight
5.7.2. CD3+ cell dose used for  prophylactic DLI in fully matched related transplants if DLI are 
used without G-CSF mobilization, or if DLI are obtained from unrelated or one antigen 
mismatched related transplants with G-CSF mobilization:
1st DLI – 1 x 106/kg of recipient's weight, 
2nd DLI – 5 x 106/kg of recipient's weight, 
3rd DLI – 1 x 107/kg of recipient's weight 
4th DLI – 5 x 107/kg of recipient’s weight
5.7.3. CD3+ cell dose used for prophylactic DLI in fully matched unrelated transplants or one 
antigen mismatched related transplants when DLI are collected without G-CSF 
mobilization:


1st DLI - 1-5 x 105/kg of recipient's weight
2nd DLI - 1 x 106/kg of recipient's weight
3rd DLI
- 5 x 106/kg of recipient's weight 
4th DLI - 1 x 107/kg of recipient’s weight
5.7.4. When DLIs are used for treatment of molecular or cytogenetic relapse, one may start 
with the 2nd dose level, or skip dose levels.
5.7.5. CD3+ cell dose used for DLI for patients with >1 antigen mismatch or for patients who 
underwent TCD transplants:
5.7.5.1 Dose is 3 x 104/kg of recipient's weight; subsequent DLI is the same as the first 
dos or it could be increased to 6 x 104/kg. CD3+ cells. 
5.7.6. Cell dose for progenitor cell boost:
5.7.6.1 Autologous progenitor cell boost - No limitations to cell dose, unless a DMSO 
limit is reached (DMSO should not exceed 10cc/kg/day of unwashed 
cryopreserved cells).
5.7.6.2 Note: Progenitor cell boost in allogeneic transplants: The amount of progenitor 
cells infused will be limited by CD3+ content of the graft. The dose should not 
exceed 1x108 CD3+ cells/kg of recipient's weight. If more than 1x108 CD3+ 
cells/kg of recipient's weight are infused, GvHD prophylaxis is recommended.
5.7.6.3 In TCD transplants, progenitor cell boost is limited by CD3+ cell content. The 
infusion is typically 10-20 x106 of CD34+ cells/kg of recipient weight, and up to 3 x 
104 /kg of CD3+ of recipient’s weight.
5.7.7. Discontinuation of DLI or progenitor cell boosts.
5.7.7.1 If GvHD or any other side effects such as pancytopenia or pulmonary 
complications develop after DLI, no more DLI infusions are given. If patient 
reaches 100% donor engraftment, DLIs are discontinued. If a patient undergoing 
TCD transplant reaches CD4+ count of >100/microliter, DLIs are discontinued.
5.7.7.2 Progenitor cell boosts are discontinued if a complication related to boost occurs 
(such as GvHD), or if a patient achieves transfusion independence.
6.0
Outcomes:
6.1
The number of additional donor cell infusions is recorded in the Pediatric BMT database and 
reported to the CIBMTR/NMDP.
6.2
The incidence of grade 3 and 4 complications related to the infusions are reported in the PBMT 
database and analyzed annually.
7.0
References:
7.1
Yan CH, Liu DH, Liu KY, X LP, Liu YR, Chen H, et al. Risk stratification- directed donor 
lymphocyte infusion could reduce relapse of standard-risk acute leukemia patients after 
allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood 2012;119(14):3256-3262.
7. 2
Ozyurek E, Cowan M, Koerper M, Baxter-Lowe L-A, Dvorak C and HornB. Increasing Mixed 
Chimerism and the Risk of Graft Loss in Children Undergoing Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem 
Cell Transplantation for Non-Malignant Disorders. Bone Marrow Transplantation, 2008;42:83-91.
7.3
Horn B, Soni S, Khan S, Petrovic A, Breslin N, Cowan M, Pelle-Day G, Cooperstein E, Baxter-
Lowe LA. Feasibility study of preemptive withdrawal of immunosuppression based on chimerism 
testing in children undergoing myeloablative allogeneic transplantation for hematologic 
malignancies. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2009:43:469-76.
7.4.
Dvorak CC, Gilman AL, Horn B, Jaroscak J, Dunn EA, Baxter-Lowe LA, Cowan MJ. Clinical and 
immunologic outcomes following haplocompatible donor lymphocyte infusions. Bone Marrow 
Transplant 2009; 44:805-12.
7.5
Horn B, Petrovic A, Wahlstrom J, Dvorak CC, Kong D, Hwang J, Expose- Spencer J, Gates M, 


Cowan MJ. Chimerism-Based Pre-Emptive Immunotherapy  with Fast Withdrawal of 
Immunosuppression and Donor Lymphocyte Infusions  after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation 
for Pediatric Hematologic  Malignancies.
7.6
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015 Jan 31. pii: S1083-8791(14)01473-6. doi: 
10.1016/j.bbmt.2014.12.029. [Epub ahead of print]


19.4:  Appendix 4 Azacitidine Administration
Name: __________________________   
MRN:
_____________
Height:                  cm         Weight:                  kg         
BSA: __________ m2       
Cycle #: _________

Cytopenias prior to Cycle 1 require dose reductions as outlined below. Cytopenias following subsequent cycles require 
dose adjustments based on nadir counts as outlined in appendix 5.
o
For platelets <30,000/uL, 50% dose reduction is recommended.
o
If platelet transfusion dependent, hold therapy until platelets >30,000/uL.
o
For neutrophils <750 or requiring GCSF support, hold therapy until toxicity improves.

Renal insufficiency:
o
Creatinine <2X baseline: No dose adjustment is required.
o
Creatinine 2-3X above baseline: Hold therapy until AKI resolves.   Restart therapy at 50% dose 
reduction. If well-tolerated, full dose may be administered.

Hepatotoxicity:
o
AST/ALT <5x ULN: No dose adjustment is required.
o
AST/ALT 5-20x ULN: Hold therapy until transaminitis resolves. May consider 50% dose reduction and 
close monitoring.
o
AST/ALT >20x ULN: Hold therapy until transaminitis resolves
o
Total bilirubin 3-10x ULN: Hold therapy until resolution; may consider 50% dose reduction and close 
monitoring
o
Total bilirubin >10x ULN: Hold therapy until resolution.

Patients will receive azacitidine at a dose of 40mg/m2 IV or SC x 4 days every 6 weeks. 

A total of 7 cycles may be administered as tolerated.

Administration of cycle #2 azacitidine following withdrawal of immunosuppression will commence (typically on a Monday) 2-8 
weeks following completion of SWI/FWI (see section 6.2 for dose adjustments).

Escalating doses of DLI, if planned, will be administered (typically on a Friday) within 7 days following the last dose of azacitidine 
every cycle (see section 5.8 for DLI schedule).
Drug
Route
Dosage
Days
Notes
Observations
Azacitidine 
(Aza)
IV over 30-60 
minutes or SQ
40mg/m²/dose 
x 4 doses
Days 1-4
Note prior nadir 
and adjust dose if 
indicated.
a Hx, PE, Wt, Ht, CBC, CMP
b CBC, CMP
*q 1 week labs during cycle 1-2
*q 2 week labs during cycle 3-7 if no 
previous dose reductions required.
Day
Date
Drug
Dosing
Dose
Route
Duration
Time
Studies
Notes
1
_____
Aza
40mg/m²/dose
_____
_____
_____
_____
a
<2 weeks prior to cycle
2
_____
Aza
40mg/m²/dose
_____
_____
_____
_____
3
_____
Aza
40mg/m²/dose
_____
_____
_____
_____
4
_____
Aza
40mg/m²/dose
_____
_____
_____
_____
5-11
DLI if indicated
8
b*
15
b*
22
b*
29
b*
35-42
a


19.5 Appendix 5: Azacitidine dose adjustments
A)
Decrease in Serum Bicarbonate
1.
Unexplained reductions of serum bicarbonate to less than 20 mEq/L occurring during 
therapy: decrease dose by 50% on the next treatment course 
B)
Myelosuppression
1.
For patients with baseline WBC of 3 x 10(9)/L or greater, absolute neutrophil count 
(ANC) of 1.5 x 10(9)/L or greater, and platelets of 75 x 10(9)/L or greater, adjust dose 
using nadir counts for any given cycle as follows:
Nadir Counts
ANC (x 109/L)
Platelets (x 109/L)
% Dose in the Next Course
less than 0.5
less than 25
50%
0.5 to 1.5
25 to 50
67%
greater than 1.5
greater than 50
100%
2.
For patients with baseline WBC less than 3 x 10(9)/L, absolute neutrophil count (ANC) 
less than 1.5 x 10(9)/L, or platelets less than 75 x 10(9)/L, adjust dose based on nadir 
counts and bone marrow biopsy cellularity at time of nadir as shown in the table 
below, unless there is a clear improvement with differentiation at the time of the 
next cycle, in which case the dose of the current treatment should be continued 
:
WBC or Platelet Nadir % Decrease in 
Counts from Baseline
Bone Marrow Biopsy Cellularity at Nadir
30 to 60
15 to 30
less than 15
% Dose in the Next Course
50 to 75
100%
50%
33%
more than 75
75%
50%
33%
3.
If a nadir as defined in the table has occurred and both the WBC and platelet counts 
are more than 25% above the nadir and rising, the next course should be given at 
least 28 days after the start of the preceding course. If the WBC and platelet counts 
are not at least 25% above the nadir by day 28, counts should be reassessed every 7 
days. If a 25% increase has not occurred by day 42, the patient should be treated with 
50% of the scheduled dose.


19.6
Appendix 6: Procedure for AML gene expression and mutation panel testing
AML gene expression and mutation panels to NIH (Hourigan Lab) for AML patients only
At the time of routine laboratory evaluation (venipuncture or bone marrow examination) additional patient 
samples will be obtained for research purposes if in the judgment of the principal investigator this can be 
accomplished safely and within national and institutional guidelines regarding blood sampling in children 
involved in clinical research.
1.0
Required research samples (see Table 1):  
1.1
Bone marrow aspirate samples
1.1.1
An additional 2ml of bone marrow aspirate sample for research will be collected during 
scheduled clinically indicated bone marrow examination at day +30, +90 and +180 (+/- 
14 days) using commonly used anticoagulants and transferred to a PAXgene Bone 
Marrow RNA tube (Qiagen/BD, Catalog: 764114).
1.2
Peripheral blood samples
1.2.1
An additional 2.5ml of peripheral blood will be collected for research at days +30, +90 
and +180 (+/- 14 days) during scheduled venipuncture for clinical indications and 
transferred to a PAXgene Blood RNA tube (Qiagen/BD, Catalog: 762165)
2.0
Storage of PAXgene tubes
PAXgene tubes should be used in accordance with manufacturer instructions.  Generally, following 
sample collection tubes should be inverted 8-10 times, stored at room temperature for between 2 and 
72 hours before transfer to -20C freezer.  Samples may be stored in a -20C freezer for up to five 
years.
3.0
Sample de-identification/coding
All human subjects personally identifiable information (PII) as defined in accordance to the Health 
Insurance Portability and Accountability will be stored securely at University of California San 
Francisco in a secure electronic database designed for this purpose.  Enrolled patients will be 
assigned a unique identification. Patient samples will be de-identified and labeled with an 
identification code and the date the sample was drawn. The Study Chair will supervise the creation of 
de-identified reports, using the patient unique identification code, containing the following information 
to disclose with scientific and statistical collaborators at the National Institute of Health:
•
Date of enrolment in this study 
•
Dates and kinds of interventions received on study.
•
Dates and volumes of study samples collected 
•
Details of donor and recipient chimerism analysis.
•
AML morphological subtype 
•
AML karyotype (Cytogenetics, FISH) 
•
AML molecular mutation status (e.g.: FLT3, NPM1) 
•
Current AML remission status and duration (e.g.: CR1 since 09/01/12)
4.0
Sample Transportation, Storage and Tracking: Cryopreserved, de-identified samples will be 
transferred on dry-ice to the National Institutes of Health in batches. Samples will be received, stored 
and tracked in existing password protected database under the supervision of: 
 
 
 


 
 
Samples will be stored until they are no longer of scientific value or until the volunteer withdraws 
consent, at which time they will be destroyed.
5.0
Proposed laboratory studies
5.1
Research samples will be analyzed by investigators of the National Institutes of Health 
intramural program. They will not be submitted for pathology review or used for diagnostic 
purposes rather they will be used strictly for laboratory research studies designed to 
characterize the levels of disease burden in patients with AML.
5.2
We will utilize multiple molecular biology technologies for this research including (but not 
limited to) microarrays, single nucleotide polymorphism arrays, gene-expression arrays 
using qRT-PCR, mutational arrays using qRT-PCR, digital PCR, targeted re-sequencing for 
common AML somatic mutations and RNA sequencing.


19.7: Multicenter Institutional Studies
Data and Safety Monitoring Plan for Multicenter Institutional Study (Phase 2 or 3 Institutional Study)
The UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center (HDFCCC) Data and Safety Monitoring 
Committee (DSMC) is responsible for monitoring data quality and subject safety for all HDFCCC institutional 
clinical studies. A summary of DSMC activities for this study includes: 
Review of subject data
Review of suspected adverse reactions considered “serious”
Monthly monitoring (depending on study accrual)
Minimum of a yearly regulatory audit
Monitoring and Reporting Guidelines
All institutional Phase 2 or 3 therapeutic studies are designated with a moderate risk assessment. The data 
is monitored every six months, with twenty percent of the subjects monitored (or at least three subjects if the 
calculated value is less than three).
The UCSF Coordinating Center provides administration, data management, and organizational support for 
the participating sites in the conduct of a multicenter clinical trial. The UCSF Coordinating Center will also 
coordinate quarterly conference calls with the participating sites to communicate the review of adverse 
events, safety data, and other study matters.
The Principal Investigator at the UCSF Coordinating Center will hold the role of Study Chair. The Study Chair 
is responsible for the overall conduct of the study and for monitoring its safety and progress at all 
participating sites. The Study Chair will conduct continuous review of data and subject safety and discuss 
each subject’s treatment at monthly UCSF Site Committee meetings. The discussions are documented in the 
UCSF Site Committee meeting minutes.
Multicenter communication
The UCSF Coordinating Center provides administration, data management, and organizational support for 
the participating sites in the conduct of a multicenter clinical trial. The UCSF Coordinating Center will also 
coordinate conference calls with the participating sites at the completion of each cohort or as frequently as 
needed to discuss risk assessment.  The following issues will be discussed as appropriate:
Enrollment information 
Adverse events (i.e. new adverse events and updates on unresolved adverse events and new safety 
information)
Protocol violations
Other issues affecting the conduct of the study
Adverse events reporting to the DSMC will include reports from the UCSF Coordinating Center as well as the 
participating sites. The DSMC will be responsible for monitoring all data entered in OnCore® at the UCSF 
Coordinating Center and the participating sites. The data (i.e. copies of source documents) from the 
participating sites will be sent electronically or faxed over to the UCSF Coordinating Center prior to the 


monitoring visits in order for the DSMC to monitor the participating site’s compliance with the protocol, 
patient safety, and to verify data entry.
Adverse Event Review and Monitoring
Adverse Event Monitoring
All reported events entered into OnCore® will be reviewed on a monthly basis at the UCSF Site Committee 
meetings. All clinically significant adverse events must be reported to the UCSF Coordinating Center by the 
participating sites within 10 business days of becoming aware of the event or during the next scheduled 
quarterly conference call, whichever is sooner. The UCSF Site Committee will review and discuss the 
selected toxicity, the toxicity grade, and the attribution of relationship of the adverse event to the 
administration of the study treatment from the UCSF Coordinating Center and the participating sites.
In addition, all suspected adverse reactions considered “serious” must be entered in OnCore® and reported 
to the UCSF Coordinating Center within 1 business day of the site learning of the event. The suspected 
adverse reactions considered “serious” will be reviewed and monitored by the Data and Safety Monitoring 
Committee on an ongoing basis and discussed at the DSMC meeting, which take place every six (6) weeks.
If a death occurs during the treatment phase of the study or within 30 days after the last administration of the 
study treatment and is determined to be related either to the investigational drug or any research related 
procedure, the Study Chair at the UCSF Coordinating Center or the assigned designee, must be notified 
within 1 business day of the participating site learning of the event and the Study Chair must then notify the 
DSMC Chair or qualified alternate within 1 business day of this notification. The contact may be by phone or 
e-mail.
Increase in Adverse Event Rates
If an increase in the frequency of Grade 3 or 4 adverse events (above the rate reported in the Investigator 
Brochure or package insert), the Study Chair at the UCSF Coordinating Center is responsible for notifying 
the DSMC at the time the increased rate is identified.  The report will indicate if the incidence of adverse 
events observed in the study is above the range stated in the Investigator Brochure or package insert.
If at any time the Study Chair stops enrollment or stops the study due to safety issues, the DSMC Chair and 
DSMC Manager must be notified within 1 business day via e-mail.  The DSMC must receive a formal letter 
within 10 business days and the CHR must be notified.
Data and Safety Monitoring Committee Contacts:
DSMC Chair: 
DSMC Monitors 
Phone: 
Email:
Address: 
 
*  DSMP approved by NCI 09/February2012


19.8: UCSF Policy/Procedure for Required Regulatory Documents for Single Site and 
Multicenter Investigator-Initiated Oncology Clinical Trials
Purpose
This policy defines the required Regulatory Documents for Single Site and Multicenter Investigator Initiated 
Oncology Clinical Trials at the Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center (HDFCCC) for both IND 
and IND-exempt trials.
Background
The International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) Good Clinical Practices (GCP) Guidelines define 
Essential Regulatory Documents as those documents which individually and collectively permit evaluation of 
the conduct of a trial and the quality of data produced. These documents serve to demonstrate compliance 
with standards of GCP and with all applicable regulatory requirements. Filing essential documents in a timely 
manner can greatly assist in the successful management of a clinical trial.
The Regulatory Documents will consist of electronic files in both iRIS and OnCore®, as well as paper files in 
the Regulatory Binders for both the Coordinating Site and the Participating Site(s) in the HDFCCC 
Investigator Initiated Oncology Clinical Trials.
Procedures
1.   Single Site (HDFCCC) Therapeutic Essential Regulatory Documents:
Documents Filed in iRIS:

Current and prior versions of the Informed Consent Form(s) (ICFs).

IRB approvals for initial submission of application, all modifications, and continuing annual renewals.

Current and prior approved protocol versions.

IRB roster

Current and prior versions of the Investigator Brochure (IB).

Serious Adverse Event (SAE) Reports.

Subject diary and handouts (if applicable).

Single Patient Exception (SPE) Report(s) to IRB with Approval Letter(s) from IRB.

Protocol Violation (PV) Reports with acknowledgement from the  IRB.
Documents Filed in OnCore®:

Package Insert (if the study drug is commercial).

Protocol signature page(s) with Pl signature(s) for all protocol versions.

Protocol Review Committee (PRC) approved protocols, protocol amendments and Summary of 
Changes (SOC) document.

Screening/enrollment log.

Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) monitoring reports.

DSMC dose escalation approvals with study status summary forms.

Case Report Form (CRF) completion manual.

Drug Destruction Standard Operating Procedure (SOP).

As applicable, approvals for Biosafety Committee, Radiation Committee, and Infusion Center.

Serious Adverse Event (SAE) reports to IRB.

Drug Destruction Standard Operating Procedure (SOP).


Documents Filed in Regulatory Binder:

Delegation of Authority Log with signatures (to be scanned in OnCore once the trial is complete).
2.   Additional Essential Documents for Therapeutic Multicenter Trials for the Coordinating Center 
(filed in OnCore or Zip Drive):
•
Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval letters, IRB roster, Informed Consent Form (ICF), and 
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act {HIPAA) Consent Form for the Participating 
Site(s).
•
For all Principal Investigators and Sub-Investigators listed on the 1572 at the Participating Site(s), will 
need Financial Disclosure Forms, CVs, MD Licenses, and Staff Training documents (i.e. 
Collaborative Institute Training Initiative (CITI), etc.) (for investigational New Drug Application).
•
Site Initiation Visit (SIV) minutes and correspondence with the Participating Site(s).
•
As applicable, approvals for Biosafety Committee, Radiation Committee, and Infusion Center for the 
Participating Site(s).
•
Protocol Violations (PV) Reports to IRB with acknowledgement from IRB for Participating Site(s).
•
Single Patient Exception (SPE) Reports to IRB with IRB Approval Letters for Participating Site(s).
•
Drug Destruction Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the Participating Site(s). 
•
Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) monitoring reports for the Participating Site(s).
•
Copy of the Data and Safety Monitoring Plan (DSMP) Monitoring Plan for all participating site(s) in 
Multicenter studies or Contract Research Organization (CRO) Monitoring Plan (if an outside CRO is 
used for the study).
•
Serious Adverse Event (SAE) forms submitted to the IRB for the Participating Site(s).
3.   Required Multicenter Essential Regulatory Document Checklist for Therapeutic and Non-
Therapeutic Trials (For Start-Up Only):
•
See attached checklist(s).
4.  Required Essential Regulatory Documents for Single Site and Multicenter Therapeutic IND-Exempt 
Studies (filed in OnCore):
•
For IND Exempt studies, the Essential Regulatory Documents for UCSF would include all documents 
in Section #1 of this policy. The Essential Regulatory Documents from the participating site(s) for 
Multicenter Trials when UCSF is the Coordinating Center would only include the signed protocol 
signature page, CV of the Pl, and the IRB approval letters. All other documents in Section #2 of this 
policy would be the responsibility of the Participating Site(s).
5.  Required Essential Regulatory Documents for Single Site Non-Therapeutic Studies (filed in 
OnCore):
•
For Single Site non-therapeutic trials, all Regulatory Documents in Section #1 of this policy are 
required except for: current and prior versions of the Investigator Brochure (IB), package insert (if the 
study drug is commercial), DSMC dose escalation approvals with study status summary forms, 
approvals for Biosafety Committee, Radiation Committee, and Infusion Center, and drug destruction 
SOPs.
6. Alternate Procedures


There are no alternate procedures to the HDFCCC policy for requirements for Essential Regulatory 
Documents for Multicenter Investigator-Initiated Oncology Clinical Trials.
References
•
ICH Guidance for Industry: E6 Good Clinical Practice: Consolidated Guidance (current version).
•
International Conference on Harmonization: Good Clinical Practice: Consolidated Guideline (current 
version).
•
International Conference on Harmonization: Essential Documents for the Conduct of a Clinical Trial 
(current version).
•
21CFR50
•
21 CFR56.11
•
45CFR46
•
21 CFR312


Required Regulatory Documents for Sub-sites Participating in Therapeutic UCSF Investigator 
Initiated Multicenter trial 
Directions: Scan the documents in a zip drive and upload to OnCore.
1572
PI and Sub investigators:

CV and Medical license 

Financial disclosure form

NIH or CITI human subject protection training certification
Laboratories:  

CLIA &CAP and Lab Licenses

CV and Medical License of Lab Director

Laboratory reference ranges
Local Institutional Review Board 
IRB Approval letter
Reviewed/Approved documents

Protocol version date: ___________

Informed consent version date: ___________

Investigator Brochure version date:___________

HIPAA
Current IRB Roster
Other 
Delegation of Authority Log 

Include NIH or CITI human subject protection training certificates or GCP training certification
Pharmacy

Drug destruction SOP and Policy
Protocol signature page 
Executed sub contract


20.0
References
1.
M. Bitan et al., Transplantation for children with acute myeloid leukemia: a comparison of outcomes 
with reduced intensity and myeloablative regimens. Blood,  (Jan 16, 2014).
2.
J. Tracey, M. J. Zhang, E. Thiel, K. A. Sobocinski, M. Eapen, Transplantation conditioning regimens 
and outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in children and adolescents with 
acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American 
Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation 19, 255 (Feb, 2013).
3.
F. Locatelli et al., Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in children with juvenile 
myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML): results of the EWOG-MDS/EBMT trial. Blood 105, 410 (Jan 1, 
2005).
4.
M. Gita Thanarajasingam, Haesook T Kim, PhD, Corey Cutler, MD, MPH, FRCPC, Vincent T. Ho, 
MD, John Koreth, MBBS, DPhil, Edwin P Alyea III, MD, Joseph H Antin, MD, Robert J Soiffer, MD 
and Philippe Armand, MD, PhD, in 54th ASH Annual Meeting and Exposition. (Atlanta, GA, 2012).
5.
P. Bader et al., Serial and quantitative analysis of mixed hematopoietic chimerism by PCR in patients 
with acute leukemias allows the prediction of relapse after allogeneic BMT. Bone Marrow 
Transplantation 21, 487 (Mar, 1998).
6.
M. Barrios et al., Chimerism status is a useful predictor of relapse after allogeneic stem cell 
transplantation for acute leukemia. Haematologica 88, 801 (Jul, 2003).
7.
P. Bader et al., Characterization of lineage-specific chimaerism in patients with acute leukaemia and 
myelodysplastic syndrome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation before and after relapse. Br J 
Haematol 108, 761 (Mar, 2000).
8.
A. Balduzzi et al., Minimal residual disease before and after transplantation for childhood acute 
lymphoblastic leukaemia: is there any room for intervention? Br J Haematol 164, 396 (Feb, 2014).
9.
R. B. Walter et al., Significance of minimal residual disease before myeloablative allogeneic 
hematopoietic cell transplantation for AML in first and second complete remission. Blood 122, 1813 
(Sep 5, 2013).
10.
F. R. Appelbaum, Measurement of minimal residual disease before and after myeloablative 
hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute leukemia. Best practice & research. Clinical haematology 
26, 279 (Sep, 2013).
11.
V. Gandemer et al., Clinical value of pre-transplant minimal residual disease in childhood 
lymphoblastic leukaemia: the results of the French minimal residual disease-guided protocol. Br J 
Haematol 165, 392 (May, 2014).
12.
A. Bacigalupo et al., Increased risk of leukemia relapse with high-dose cyclosporine A after allogeneic 
marrow transplantation for acute leukemia. Blood 77, 1423 (Apr 1, 1991).
13.
T. L. Andrea Bacigalupo, Francesca Gualandi, Stefania Bregante, AnnaMaria Raiola, Carmen di 
Grazia, Alida Dominietto, Chiara Romagnani, Domenico Occhini, Francesco Frassoni, and Maria 
Teresa van Lint, Increased risk of leukemia relapse with high dose cyclosporine after allogeneic 
marrow transplantation for acute leukemia: 10 year follow-up of a randomized study. Blood 98,  
(November 15, 2001, 2001).
14.
F. Locatelli et al., Graft versus host disease prophylaxis with low-dose cyclosporine-A reduces the 
risk of relapse in children with acute leukemia given HLA-identical sibling bone marrow 
transplantation: results of a randomized trial. Blood 95, 1572 (Mar 1, 2000).
15.
R. Storb et al., Methotrexate and cyclosporine for graft-vs.-host disease prevention: what length of 
therapy with cyclosporine? Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American 
Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation 3, 194 (Oct, 1997).
16.
H. Baurmann et al., Kinetics of the graft-versus-leukemia response after donor leukocyte infusions for 
relapsed chronic myeloid leukemia after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Blood 92, 3582 
(Nov 15, 1998).
17.
F. Dazzi et al., Comparison of single-dose and escalating-dose regimens of donor lymphocyte 
infusion for relapse after allografting for chronic myeloid leukemia. Blood 95, 67 (Jan 1, 2000).
18.
M. Tomblyn, H. M. Lazarus, Donor lymphocyte infusions: the long and winding road: how should it be 
traveled? Bone Marrow Transplantation 42, 569 (Nov, 2008).


19.
G. Massenkeil et al., Reduced intensity conditioning and prophylactic DLI can cure patients with high-
risk acute leukaemias if complete donor chimerism can be achieved. Bone Marrow Transplantation 
31, 339 (Mar, 2003).
20.
D. I. Marks et al., The toxicity and efficacy of donor lymphocyte infusions given after reduced-intensity 
conditioning allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Blood 100, 3108 (Nov 1, 2002).
21.
A. Pinto, M. Maio, V. Attadia, S. Zappacosta, R. Cimino, Modulation of HLA-DR antigens expression 
in human myeloid leukaemia cells by cytarabine and 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine. Lancet 2, 867 (Oct 13, 
1984).
22.
S. Coral et al., Prolonged upregulation of the expression of HLA class I antigens and costimulatory 
molecules on melanoma cells treated with 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine (5-AZA-CdR). Journal of 
immunotherapy 22, 16 (Jan, 1999).
23.
O. C. Goodyear et al., Azacitidine augments expansion of regulatory T cells after allogeneic stem cell 
transplantation in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Blood 119, 3361 (Apr 5, 2012).
24.
A. Rohner, U. Langenkamp, U. Siegler, C. P. Kalberer, A. Wodnar-Filipowicz, Differentiation-
promoting drugs up-regulate NKG2D ligand expression and enhance the susceptibility of acute 
myeloid leukemia cells to natural killer cell-mediated lysis. Leukemia research 31, 1393 (Oct, 2007).
25.
X. N. Gao, J. Lin, L. L. Wang, L. Yu, Demethylating treatment suppresses natural killer cell cytolytic 
activity. Molecular immunology 46, 2064 (Jun, 2009).
26.
B. J. Schmiedel et al., Azacytidine impairs NK cell reactivity while decitabine augments NK cell 
responsiveness toward stimulation. International journal of cancer. Journal international du cancer 
128, 2911 (Jun 15, 2011).
27.
M. Katja Sockel, Claudia Schönefeldt, MSc, Sieghart Sopper, Martin Wermke, MD, Marc Schmitz, 
MD, Gerhard Ehninger, Martin Bornhäuser, MD, Dominik Wolf, MD and Uwe Platzbecker, MD, in 
American Society of Hematology. (Atlanta, GA, 2012).
28.
M. de Lima et al., Maintenance therapy with low-dose azacitidine after allogeneic hematopoietic stem 
cell transplantation for recurrent acute myelogenous leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome: a dose 
and schedule finding study. Cancer 116, 5420 (Dec 1, 2010).
29.
U. Platzbecker et al., Azacitidine for treatment of imminent relapse in MDS or AML patients after 
allogeneic HSCT: results of the RELAZA trial. Leukemia 26, 381 (Mar, 2012).
30.
V. M. Klimek, M. S. Tallman, Hypomethylating agents in acute lymphoblastic leukemia: untapped 
potential? Leuk Lymphoma 52, 7 (Jan, 2011).
31.
L. Yanez, A. Bermudez, C. Richard, E. Bureo, A. Iriondo, Successful induction therapy with 
decitabine in refractory childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia 23, 1342 (Jul, 2009).
32.
T. Schroeder et al., Azacitidine and donor lymphocyte infusions as first salvage therapy for relapse of 
AML or MDS after allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Leukemia 27, 1229 (Jun, 2013).
33.
F. Ravandi et al., Decitabine with allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in the therapy 
of leukemia relapse following a prior transplant: results of a phase I study. Bone Marrow 
Transplantation 27, 1221 (Jun, 2001).
34.
H. Kantarjian et al., Results of a randomized study of 3 schedules of low-dose decitabine in higher-
risk myelodysplastic syndrome and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia. Blood 109, 52 (Jan 1, 2007).
35.
M. Karon et al., 5-Azacytidine: a new active agent for the treatment of acute leukemia. Blood 42, 359 
(Sep, 1973).
36.
D. Kalwinsky et al., Early intensification of chemotherapy for childhood acute nonlymphoblastic 
leukemia: improved remission induction with a five-drug regimen including etoposide. Journal of 
Clinical Oncology 6, 1134 (Jul, 1988).
37.
C. P. Steuber et al., Therapy of refractory or recurrent childhood acute myeloid leukemia using 
amsacrine and etoposide with or without azacitidine: a Pediatric Oncology Group randomized phase 
II study. Journal of Clinical Oncology 14, 1521 (May, 1996).
38.
H. Zetterquist et al., Mixed chimerism in the B cell lineage is a rapid and sensitive indicator of minimal 
residual disease in bone marrow transplant recipients with pre-B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. 
Bone Marrow Transplantation 25, 843 (Apr, 2000).


39.
J. Mattsson, M. Uzunel, L. Tammik, J. Aschan, O. Ringden, Leukemia lineage-specific chimerism 
analysis is a sensitive predictor of relapse in patients with acute myeloid leukemia and 
myelodysplastic syndrome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Leukemia 15, 1976 (Dec, 2001).
40.
B. Horn et al., Feasibility study of preemptive withdrawal of immunosuppression based on chimerism 
testing in children undergoing myeloablative allogeneic transplantation for hematologic malignancies. 
Bone Marrow Transplantation 43, 469 (Mar, 2009).
41.
C. S. Hourigan, J. E. Karp, Minimal residual disease in acute myeloid leukaemia. Nature reviews. 
Clinical oncology 10, 460 (Aug, 2013).
42.
E. Paietta, Minimal residual disease in acute myeloid leukemia: coming of age. Hematology / the 
Education Program of the American Society of Hematology. American Society of Hematology. 
Education Program 2012, 35 (2012).
43.
C. S. Hourigan, P. McCarthy, M. de Lima, Back to the future! The evolving role of maintenance 
therapy after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : 
journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation 20, 154 (Feb, 2014).
44.
M. Marie Ouachee-Chardin, Christopher C. Dvorak, MD, Justin Wahlstrom, MD, Morton Jerome 
Cowan, MD, Janelle Facchino, PNP, and Biljana N. Horn, MD, in American Society of Hematology. 
(New Orleans, LA, 2013).
45.
Thall PF, Simon RM, Estey EH. Bayesian sequential monitoring designs for single-arm clinical trials 
with multiple outcomes. Stat Med 1995; 14: 357–379.

ICF_000.pdf: 
Recipient Assent 03-23-2015 
Page 1 of 3 
 
UNIVERISTY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO (UCSF) 
ASSENT TO BE IN A RESEARCH STUDY 
ABOUT CANCER TREATMENT 
For RECIPIENT children 7-12 years old 
A phase II study of donor lymphocyte infusion in combination with azacitidine for the 
prevention of hematologic malignancy relapse following allogeneic stem cell 
transplantation 
Name of recipient________________________________ 
Why are we meeting with you? 
We want to tell you about something we are doing called a research study.  A research study is 
when doctors collect a lot of information to learn more about something.  
 
and some other doctors are doing a study to learn more about children with cancer.  After we tell 
you about it, we will ask if you’d like to be in this study or not. 
Why are we doing this study? 
The study is being done to learn more about treatments done after blood or bone marrow 
transplants to help get rid of your own cells in the blood after the transplant.  The study doctors 
hope this treatment will make it less likely that your cancer will return.  
 What will happen to you if you are in the study? 
Only if you agree, these things will happen: 
1.
After your transplant, once your white blood cells build up again (usually 4-5 weeks),
your doctor will check whether you have any signs of a sickness called graft-versus-host
disease (GVHD).  GVHD happens when your donor’s cells attack your own cells after
the transplant, which can cause problems like skin rash, diarrhea, yellow skin or yellow
eyes.  We will also test your blood and bone marrow for donor’s cells.  The doctors will
do both these things even if you are not in this study.  The next parts of your treatment
will depend on two things:  1) whether you have graft-versus-host disease, 2) whether
your bone marrow has mostly your cells or mostly your donor’s cells, and 3) whether
there are any cancer cells still in your blood
2. If you do not have graft-versus-host disease, then the treatments which help your body
accept your donor’s cells will be slowly stopped.  If there are mostly donor cells in your
bone marrow, these treatments will be stopped over 10 weeks, and you will start taking a
drug called azacitidine once they are over.  Every 6 weeks you will take azacitidine for
IRB NUMBER: 14-14991
IRB APPROVAL DATE: 05/05/2015
IRB EXPIRATION DATE: 05/04/2016
NCT# 02458235


Recipient Assent 03-23-2015 
Page 2 of 3 
 
up to 4 days in a row for up to 7 separate times (called cycles).  Azacitidine can be given 
through your veins in the clinic or at home as a shot under your skin.   
 
3. If there is a mixture of your own cells and your donor’s cells, then the treatments which 
help your body accept your donor’s cells will be stopped over 4 weeks instead of 10.  
You will then take azacitidine in the same way as the group above.  You may also receive 
more cells from your donor, called donor lymphocyte infusions on day 5 of each cycle if 
there are enough donor cells.  These cells will be given directly into your veins.   Each 
time you are given more donor cells, the amount of these cells will increase if you are not 
having too many problems from this treatment.    
 
4. You will be watched for signs of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) regardless of which 
treatment you are receiving. You will be asked to call your doctor right away if a rash, 
diarrhea or jaundice appears.  If you develop signs of graft-versus-host disease, your 
doctor will start treating that disease by giving you more medicine. You will be asked to 
come back to the clinic more often (maybe as often as once a week) and you may even 
need to spend a night in the hospital.  The doctors will do these things even if you are not 
in this study. 
 
5. It is possible that the number of donor cells in your blood will change during your 
treatment.  Because of this, your doctor will test your blood 4-8 weeks after each cycle of 
azacitidine and check your bone marrow every two cycles.    
 
6. If your bone marrow tests show a small number of cancer cells in the bone marrow (less 
than 1 in 100 cells) you will continue with treatments on this study. If the amount of 
cancer cells is large, you may stop the study treatment and get other treatments 
recommended by your doctor. 
 
 Will this study hurt? 
 
Drawing blood through the central line (the tube that is used to give you medicine and blood) 
does not hurt.  Bone marrow are the cells inside of your bone and you will be given anesthesia 
(medicine to make you sleep) so you will not feel the bone marrow being taken out.  If you get a 
skin rash, it may be itchy. Diarrhea can cause some stomach pain. Yellowing of the skin and eyes 
usually does not hurt. If you get a skin rash and diarrhea, you will probably be admitted to the 
hospital to get pain medicine and other medicine to treat your symptoms.  
 
Will you get better if you are in this study? 
 
The treatment in this study may help keep your sickness from coming back in the future, but 
there is also a chance that it will not help. The doctors might find out something that will help 
other children like you later. 
 
 Do you have any questions? 
 
IRB NUMBER: 14-14991
IRB APPROVAL DATE: 05/05/2015
IRB EXPIRATION DATE: 05/04/2016


Recipient Assent 03-23-2015 
Page 3 of 3 
 
You can ask questions any time. You can ask now. You can ask later. You can talk to me or you 
can talk to someone else. 
 
Do you have to be in the study? 
 
No, you don’t.  No one will be mad at you if you don’t want to do this.  If you don’t want to be 
in this study, just tell us.  Or if you do want to be in the study, tell us that.  And, remember, you 
can say yes now and change your mind later.  It’s up to you. 
 
If you don’t want to be in this study, just tell us. 
 
If you want to be in this study, just tell us. 
The doctor will give you a copy of this form to keep. 
 
 
SIGNATURE OF PERSON CONDUCTING ASSENT DISCUSSION 
 
I have explained the study to ______________________ (print name of child here) in language 
he/she can understand, and the child has agreed to be in the study. 
 
 
__________________________________  
 
_______________ 
Signature of Person Conducting Assent Discussion  
Date 
 
 
 
_______________________________ 
Name of Person Conducting Assent Discussion (print) 
 
 
 
__________________________________  
 
 
_______________ 
Signature of Translator, if applicable  
 
 
Date 
 
IRB NUMBER: 14-14991
IRB APPROVAL DATE: 05/05/2015
IRB EXPIRATION DATE: 05/04/2016