PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 27, 2015Blood305 citationsOpen Access

Risk-stratified outcomes of nonmyeloablative HLA-haploidentical BMT with high-dose posttransplantation cyclophosphamide

View Full Paper
SMShannon R. McCurdyJKJennifer A. KanakryMSMargaret M. Showel

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Related HLA-haploidentical blood or marrow transplantation (BMT) with high-dose posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is being increasingly used because of its acceptable safety profile. To better define outcomes of nonmyeloablative (NMA) HLA-haploidentical BMT with PTCy, 372 consecutive adult hematologic malignancy patients who underwent this procedure were retrospectively studied. Risk-stratified outcomes were evaluated using the refined Disease Risk Index (DRI), developed to stratify disease risk across histologies and allogeneic BMT regimens. Patients received uniform conditioning, T-cell-replete allografting, then PTCy, mycophenolate mofetil, and tacrolimus. Six-month probabilities of nonrelapse mortality and severe acute graft-versus-host disease were 8% and 4%. With 4.1-year median follow-up, 3-year probabilities of relapse, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were 46%, 40%, and 50%, respectively. By refined DRI group, low (n = 71), intermediate (n = 241), and high/very high (n = 60) risk groups had 3-year PFS estimates of 65%, 37%, and 22% (P < .0001), with corresponding 3-year OS estimates of 71%, 48%, and 35% (P = .0001). On multivariable analyses, the DRI was statistically significantly associated with relapse, PFS, and OS (each P < .001). This analysis demonstrates that the DRI effectively risk stratifies recipients of NMA HLA-haploidentical BMT with PTCy and also suggests that this transplantation platform yields similar survivals to those seen with HLA-matched BMT.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

McCurdy et al. (2015) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0e7b2e27a8fd07fe04364ehttps://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2015-01-623991
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma2007 · 4,467 citations
  2. 2National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on Criteria for Clinical Trials in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: I. Diagnosis and Staging Working Group Report2005 · 3,566 citations
  3. 3Phase I Trial of Maintenance Sorafenib after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Fms-like Tyrosine Kinase 3 Internal Tandem Duplication Acute Myeloid Leukemia2014 · 235 citations
  4. 41994 Consensus Conference on Acute GVHD Grading.1995 · 5,087 citations
  5. 5A Class of $K$-Sample Tests for Comparing the Cumulative Incidence of a Competing Risk1988 · 5,020 citations