MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981257299 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-119162

High Incidence but Very Low Mortality of Epstein Barr Virus Related Post-Transplantation Lymphoproliferative Disorder after T-Cell Replete Haploidentical Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation

2018· article· en· W2981257299 on OpenAlexaff
Queralt Salas Gay, Zeyad Al‐Shaibani, Wilson Lam, Fotios V. Michelis, Santhosh Thyagu, Dennis Dong Hwan Kim, Jeff H. Lipton, Rajat Kumar, Auro Viswabandya, Arjun Law

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral-associated cancers and disorders
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFludarabineTransplantationInternal medicineBusulfanImmunosuppressionGastroenterologyTotal body irradiationHematopoietic stem cell transplantationCumulative incidenceIncidence (geometry)Lymphoproliferative disordersRegimenPost-transplant lymphoproliferative disorderImmunologyGraft-versus-host diseaseSurgeryRituximabCyclophosphamideLymphomaChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND The use of immunosuppressive agents such as antithymocyte globulin (ATG) as graft-versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis may increase the risk of Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) related post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD). The aim of the present study is to report the incidence, risk factors, and outcome of PTLD in the setting of haploidentical stem cell transplant (haploSCT) combining PTCy and ATG as GVHD prophylaxis. METHODS From August 2016 to May 2018, 55 adult patients diagnosed with hematological malignancies underwent T-cell replete haploSCT. All patients received a reduced intensity conditioning regimen (RIC) with fludarabine, busulfan, and 200cGy of total body irradiation (TBI), combined with rabbit ATG, PTCy and cyclosporine (Cy). EBV titre was monitored by quantitative PCR in plasma samples. The cut-off value for test positivity was >600 copies of EBV DNA per milliliter of plasma. Testing was performed weekly from engraftment to day 100 and beyond in case the patients were on immunosuppression. Data was collected through retrospective chart review. Last follow up was updated in June 31, 2018. Median follow-up was 9.5 months (range 1-21). RESULTS Patient and donor characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Median age was 57 (22-73) years, with 23 (43%) patients ≥60 years. Overall survival of the 55 patients at 6 months was 70% (95% CI 57-83), and 51% (95% CI 46-66) at 1 year. EBV reactivation was documented in 31 (57%) patients. Median time to EBV reactivation was 54 (20-326) days. Three (5.5%) patients developed presumed PTLD with EBV-viremia higher than 1x10E6 copies and corroborative imaging. Three (5.5%) had biopsy-proven PTLD (Table 2). Median time since EBV reactivation to presumed/proven (P/P)-PTLD was 25 (3-36) days. All cases occurred early post-transplant within the first 100 days. Four patients were on therapeutic doses of cyclosporine. All 6 (11%) patients received treatment with weekly Rituximab 375 mg/m+. Five (83%) patients achieved complete clinical responses with PCR negativity with reduction of immunosuppression and single agent rituximab. One patient died of complications of viral encephalitis and bacterial pneumonia. CONCLUSION ATG based conditioning can be associated with increased viral reactivations. Frequent EBV monitoring and pre-emptive treatment may lead to rapid disease control. While no guidelines exist currently, further investigation is needed to define optimal monitoring strategies. Disclosures Lipton: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicViral-associated cancers and disorders→French-language works237,207→