GVHD relapse-free survival after peripheral blood hematopoietic cell transplantation for hematologic malignancies

{"title":"GVHD relapse-free survival after peripheral blood hematopoietic cell transplantation for hematologic malignancies","authors":"","doi":"10.31547/bct-2022-014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The preferred choice for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) donors in India is a matched related donor (MRD) followed by a haploidentical (haplo) donor for patients with hematological malignancies. International data in the haplo-HCT setting is mainly using bone marrow as a source. Almost all HCTs in India use peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC), which increases the risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). In this single-center prospective study from 2017 to 2021, we sought to compare these outcomes prospectively in adult patients with hematological malignancies. Patient, disease, donor, and HCT details were prospectively recorded. GVHD prophylaxis included cyclosporine + methotrexate in MRD-HCT and post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) based in haplo-HCT. The primary endpoint GVHD relapse-free survival (GRFS) was defined as the time post-HCT without any of the following events: grade III-IV acute GVHD, chronic GVHD requiring systemic immunosuppressive treatment, disease relapse, or death from any cause. A total of 41 MRD and 33 haplo-HCT recipients were included in the study. Both cohorts were matched for age, sex, diagnosis, disease risk index, donor age, sex and CMV mismatches, and CD34 counts. A lower proportion of MRD-HCT recipients than haplo-HCT received myeloablative conditioning (39% vs. 76%, p = 0.002). There was no difference in the cumulative incidence of grade III-IV acute GVHD (16% vs. 27%, p = 0.2) or moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD (58% vs. 71%, p = 0.5). The one-year GRFS was not significantly different (53% vs. 38%, p = 0.2), with median GRFS of 420 and 274 days. The relapse incidence (22% vs. 19%, p = 0.6) and non-relapse mortality (25% vs. 35%, p = 0.4) did not differ. There was no difference in overall survival at one year (60% vs. 52%, p = 0.3). Despite a higher proportion of myeloablative conditioning in the haplo-HCT cohort, all outcomes, including GRFS, were comparable to those of the MRD-HCT cohort. This should encourage patients without an MRD to undergo haplo-HCT.","PeriodicalId":72423,"journal":{"name":"Blood cell therapy","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blood cell therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31547/bct-2022-014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The preferred choice for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) donors in India is a matched related donor (MRD) followed by a haploidentical (haplo) donor for patients with hematological malignancies. International data in the haplo-HCT setting is mainly using bone marrow as a source. Almost all HCTs in India use peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC), which increases the risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). In this single-center prospective study from 2017 to 2021, we sought to compare these outcomes prospectively in adult patients with hematological malignancies. Patient, disease, donor, and HCT details were prospectively recorded. GVHD prophylaxis included cyclosporine + methotrexate in MRD-HCT and post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) based in haplo-HCT. The primary endpoint GVHD relapse-free survival (GRFS) was defined as the time post-HCT without any of the following events: grade III-IV acute GVHD, chronic GVHD requiring systemic immunosuppressive treatment, disease relapse, or death from any cause. A total of 41 MRD and 33 haplo-HCT recipients were included in the study. Both cohorts were matched for age, sex, diagnosis, disease risk index, donor age, sex and CMV mismatches, and CD34 counts. A lower proportion of MRD-HCT recipients than haplo-HCT received myeloablative conditioning (39% vs. 76%, p = 0.002). There was no difference in the cumulative incidence of grade III-IV acute GVHD (16% vs. 27%, p = 0.2) or moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD (58% vs. 71%, p = 0.5). The one-year GRFS was not significantly different (53% vs. 38%, p = 0.2), with median GRFS of 420 and 274 days. The relapse incidence (22% vs. 19%, p = 0.6) and non-relapse mortality (25% vs. 35%, p = 0.4) did not differ. There was no difference in overall survival at one year (60% vs. 52%, p = 0.3). Despite a higher proportion of myeloablative conditioning in the haplo-HCT cohort, all outcomes, including GRFS, were comparable to those of the MRD-HCT cohort. This should encourage patients without an MRD to undergo haplo-HCT.
外周血造血细胞移植治疗恶性血液病后GVHD无复发生存率
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信