MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4310160018 · doi:10.1182/blood-2022-163594

Clinical Outcomes in Fresh Versus Cryopreserved Hematopoietic Stem Cell Products in British Columbia: A Retrospective Study

2022· article· en· W4310160018 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bo Wan, Lorenzo Lindo, Giovanna Cameron, Yasser Abou Mourad, Shanee Chung, Donna L. Forrest, Florian Kuchenbauer, Stephen H. Nantel, Sujaatha Narayanan, Thomas J. Nevill, Maryse Power, Judith Anula Rodrigo, David Sanford, Kevin Song, Ryan J. Stubbins, Heather J. Sutherland, Cynthia L. Toze, Jennifer White, Claudie Roy, Kevin A. Hay

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyTerry Fox Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyHematopoietic stem cell transplantationTransplantationSurgeryOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT) is a mainstay of treatment for hematologic malignancies such as acute leukemias and aggressive lymphomas. Conventionally, fresh donor hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPC) are used, but the COVID-19 pandemic forced many centres to switch to cryopreservation of HPC for alloHSCT. We aimed to compare the outcomes in alloHSCT patients who received cryo-HPC with a recent historical cohort of patients who received fresh-HPC at our centre. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted on all adult patients who received a bone marrow (BM) or peripheral blood alloHSCT in British Columbia between June 2017 and Jan 2022; cryo-HPCs were the predominant product used as of March 2020. CIBMTR criteria were used to define engraftment. Patients who died before 30 days post-alloHSCT were excluded from primary graft failure (GF) and GVHD analysis; those who died before 100 days post-alloHSCT or had primary GF were excluded from secondary GF and chronic GVHD analysis. Patients who were alive on the date of last follow-up (January 31, 2022) were censored. Statistical significance was calculated using the Chi square test for categorical variables and T-test or Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted for OS. Results A total of 271 alloHSCT procedures were included in the analysis, of which 134 received fresh-HPC and 137 cryo-HPC. The median age at the time of transplant was 54 years [IQR 46-64] in the fresh-HPC vs 59 [IQR 39-61] in the cryo-HPC group (p=0.02). Male recipients comprised 60% of both groups (p=1). There was no significant difference in primary diagnosis (p=0.17); AML was the most frequent indication (46% fresh-HPC vs 35% cryo-HPC), followed by ALL/LBL (20% vs 23%). Most patients were in CR1 (63% vs 53%, p=0.01). The median CD34+ cell count infused was 7x106/kg in the fresh and 6x106/kg in the cryo-HPC group (p=0.08). For the cryo-HPC, the median time from cell collection to cryopreservation was 33 hours [IQR 23, 55], with a median cell viability of 96% [IQR 95, 98]. Matched unrelated donor was the most common donor type, which comprised 75% alloHSCTs in the fresh-HPC and 54% in the cryo-HPC group (p<0.01). Bone marrow source was used for 8% and 5% of alloHSCTs in the fresh-HPC and cryo-HPC groups, respectively (p=0.10). Myeloablative condition was used in 78% fresh-HPC vs 72% cryo-HPC (p=0.31) and busulfan/fludarabine was the most common regimen (47% vs 58%, p=0.01). Most patients received GVHD prophylaxis with cyclosporine and methotrexate ± Thymoglobulin (96% in fresh HPC, 79% in cryo-HPC, p<0.01) The median follow-up was 16 months in fresh [IQR 10, 25] vs 10 months in the cryo-HPC group [IQR 5, 15] (p<0.01). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached in either group, and the 10-month OS was similar in both groups (79% fresh-HPC vs 78% cryo-HPC, p=0.74). There was no difference in OS between the groups in the patients with a diagnosis of acute leukemia (p=0.57). Relapse rates were similar (27% fresh-HPC vs 23% cryo-HPC, p=0.60) with a median time to relapse of 5 months [IQR 3, 12] vs 3 months [IQR 3, 7] respectively (p=0.07). 10-month non-relapse mortality was 16% in fresh-HPC vs 13% in the cryo-HPC group (Fig 1b, p=0.47). There were no significant differences in causes of death; disease relapse was the most common cause of death (51% fresh-HPC, 56% cryo-HPC). Median neutrophil engraftment was faster in patients receiving fresh-HPC at 18 days [IQR 15, 22] vs 20 [IQR 17, 23] with cryo-HPC (p<0.01). Median platelet engraftment was also faster for fresh-HPC with 19 days [IQR 16, 23] compared with 22 [IQR 18, 29] with cryo-HPC (p<0.01). There was 1 case of primary GF in the fresh-HPC compared to 5 in the cryo-HPC groups (p=0.07), and 4 cases of secondary GF when using fresh-HPC compared to 3 with cryo-HPC (p=0.46). The incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD was 30% in fresh HPC and 23% in cryo-HPC (p=0.06). The preliminary incidence of chronic GVHD was 43% in fresh HPC vs 33% in cryo-HPC (p=0.01). Conclusion Cryo-HPC may have prolonged time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment compared to fresh-HPC as well as increased incidence of primary graft failure. There were no significant differences in OS, relapse or acute GVHD among patients receiving fresh vs cryo-HPC in our cohort. Chronic GVHD was more common with fresh-HPC, likely due to longer follow-up times. These findings are consistent with those reported in literature. Figure 1View largeDownload PPTFigure 1View largeDownload PPT Close modal

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)0.002
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 score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation→French-language works237,207→