Steroid Failure At Day 28 After Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease Treatment and Long-Term Outcomes Following Allogeneic Transplantation: Adverse Impact On Survival and Non-Relapse Mortality But No Increasing Risk Of Relapse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) is one of major complications following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), among which severe aGVHD affects transplantation outcomes adversely. Standard treatment option is steroids for last 4 decades. However, long-term outcomes after aGVHD according to the response to steroids therapy have not been described fully. Methods Retrospective data of 393 consecutive patients who received allogeneic HSCT at the Princess Margaret Hospital from Mar 2001 to Oct 2007 were analyzed for the response to steroid therapy and for long-terms outcomes including overall survival (OS), non-relapse mortality (NRM), incidence of relapse, development of chronic GVHD and GVHD-specific survival (GSS). Response was defined as complete response (CR; complete resolution of aGVHD signs/symptoms in all organs involved), partial response (PR; any improvement in aGVHD), stable disease (SD; no improvement or no progression of aGVHD) or progressive disease (PD; worsening of aGVHD in at least 1 organ). Steroid failure was defined the case of SD/PD at day 28. Results Out of 393 patients, 305 patients (77.6%) were diagnosed of aGVHD with grade I (n=42, 10.7%), II (n=152, 38.7%), III (n=93, 23.7%), and IV (n=18, 4.6%). Among them, 278 patients (91.1%; 70.7% out of overall population) were treated with systemic steroids. Response to steroids therapy at day 28 was as follows: CR in 137 (49.3%), PR in 85 (30.6%) and SD/PD in 49 patients (17.6%), respectively. Thus, steroid failure was noted in 49 patients (17.6%) in the present study. The risk factors of steroid failure at day 28 were aGVHD grade III-IV (OR 4.116, p<0.001) and liver stage 2-4 GVHD (OR 2.480, p=0.015). Out of 305 patients who developed aGVHD of any grade, 204 patients (66.9%) eventually developed subsequent chronic GVHD including classical type of cGVHD in 89 patients (29.2%) and overlap syndrome in 115 patients (37.7%). Among 278 patients who received steroid therapy for aGVHD, the response to steroid therapy did not show significant association with the type or severity of chronic GVHD. As expected, better survival was noted in the responder group compared to those with steroid failure at day 28. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were significantly better in CR (69.94.3%) or PR groups (49.46.0%) compared to SD/PD group (i.e. those with steroid failure at day 28; 24.26.5%; p<0.001). The 5-year aGVHD-specific survival (aGSS) were also different in favor of CR (83.93.4%) or PR groups (71.95.7%) compared to SD/PD group (34.88.0%; p<0.001). The non-relapse mortality (NRM) were significantly higher in SD/PD group (65.08.0%) than in PR (28.15.7%) or CR groups (16.13.4%; p<0.001), while no differences of relapse risk were observed among the groups. In multivariate analysis, the steroids failure at D+28 was an independent risk factor for OS (HR 1.916, 95% CI=1.110-3.307, p=0.020), aGSS (HR 2.213, 95% CI=1.115-4.395, p=0.023), and NRM (HR 2.462, 95% CI 1.224-4.951, p=0.011). However, steroid failure at D+28 was not a risk factor for relapse in multivariate analysis (p=0.111). Conclusion Steroids response at day 28 for aGVHD significantly affects long-term outcomes after transplant without increasing relapse risk. Early achievement of response to steroids therapy within day 28 is associated with better OS, GSS and lower NRM. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".