Key result
Reduced-intensity conditioning before allogeneic HSCT is linked to ~20-point higher NACE rates vs. myeloablative conditioning.
Why the study?
Contemporary data on cardiovascular complications according to conditioning intensity in allogeneic HSCT patients remain limited.
Does reduced-intensity conditioning alter the incidence of early and late cardiovascular events compared to myeloablative conditioning in adult patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT?
Cohort (n=486)
No
Does reduced-intensity conditioning alter the incidence of early and late cardiovascular events compared to myeloablative conditioning in adult patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT?
Absolute Event Rate: 54% vs 33.7%
p-value: p=<0.0001
Reduced-intensity conditioning for allogeneic HSCT is associated with higher early and late cardiovascular morbidity compared to myeloablative conditioning, though it does not significantly increase cardiovascular or short-term mortality.
RIC-associated NACE elevation warrants caution in HSCT selection; leaves open causal effects of conditioning intensity on cardiovascular outcomes.
Background Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is increasingly offered to older and comorbid patients through reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC). However, contemporary data on cardiovascular complications according to conditioning intensity remain limited. Purpose To compare early and late cardiovascular events between myeloablative conditioning (MAC) and reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens in patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT. Methods We conducted a single-centre retrospective cohort study including adult patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT between 2013 and 2024. Patients were classified according to conditioning intensity (MAC vs RIC). Baseline cardiovascular risk factors, early cardiovascular complications (≤100 days), late cardiovascular events (>100 days), and mortality were collected. A composite endpoint of net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE) was analysed. Comparisons between groups were performed using appropriate statistical tests. Results A total of 486 patients were included (MAC n=296; RIC n=190). Patients receiving RIC were significantly older and had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors, including hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, coronary artery disease, and prior stroke. Acute cardio-toxicity within 100 days occurred more frequently in RIC compared with MAC (41.6% vs 25.3%, p=0.0002), mainly driven by a higher incidence of acute left ventricular dysfunction (9.5% vs 3.7%, p=0.008) and early pericardial effusion (32.3% vs 22.6%, p=0.02), while early atrial arrhythmias were numerically higher but not statistically different. During follow-up beyond 100 days, late cardiovascular events were uncommon overall. Pericardial effusion remained more frequent in RIC (4.2% vs 1.4%, p=0.07), and myocardial infarction occurred exclusively in the RIC group (3.2% vs 0.0%, p=0.003). The composite NACE rate was significantly higher in RIC (54.0% vs 33.7%, p<0.0001). Cardiovascular mortality was low and comparable between groups (1.6% vs 1.7%, p=0.9), as was 100-day mortality. Conclusions Reduced-intensity conditioning, generally used in patients with increased frailty, is associated with a higher burden of early and late cardiovascular morbidity after allogeneic HSCT, particularly driven by acute dysfunction and pericardial effusion. However, these complications do not translate into increased early or cardiovascular mortality, suggesting a more complex but not more lethal cardiovascular phenotype in RIC patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vito et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (n=486). Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) vs. Myeloablative conditioning (MAC) was evaluated on Composite endpoint of net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE) (p=<0.0001). Reduced-intensity conditioning before allogeneic HSCT was associated with a higher rate of net adverse cardiovascular events compared to myeloablative conditioning (54.0% vs 33.7%, p<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: