The Impact of Post-Transplant Cyclophosphamide (PTCy) with or without MMF in the Prevention of <i>De Novo</i> and <i>Progressive / Relapsing</i> Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease after HLA-Matched Donor Transplant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We previously showed that PTCy/Tac ± MMF is associated with a significant reduction in the rate of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGvHD) as compared to Tac/MTX after HLA-matched sibling (MSD) but not after HLA-matched unrelated (MUD) donor stem cell transplant (SCT). Notably, ATG was used with Tac/MTX in MUD but not in MSD. [ Transplant Cell Ther. 2022;28(10):695] We aimed to further elucidate the epidemiology of cGvHD with the use of PTCy/Tac by comparing the impact of Tac/MTX vs PTCy/Tac ± MMF on de novo and progressive/relapsing cGvHD. Methods: Recipients of a MSD (Tac/MTX no ATG, or PTCy-based) or MUD (Tac/MTX with ATG, or PTCy-based) peripheral blood SCT between 2015-21 at our institution were eligible. To evaluate the impact of prophylaxis on the incidence of de novo and progressive/relapsing cGvHD, we performed two separate landmark analyses starting 3 months (mo) post-SCT among patients who had not and those who had been diagnosed with acute GvHD (aGvHD) within 3 mo post-SCT, respectively. Patients who died or experienced relapse of malignancy (n=135) or were diagnosed with cGvHD within 3 mo post-SCT (n=13) were excluded from the landmark analyses. There was no difference in the rate of early death/relapse or cGvHD by prophylaxis. Results: 1040 patients met the eligibility criteria. Median follow-up in survivors was 28 mo (IQRT: 18, 50). The cumulative incidence (CumInc) of cGvHD in the Tac/MTX, PTCy/Tac without MMF, and PTC/Tac with MMF groups was 39% (34-45, reference), 20% (14-29, p<0.001) and 20% (13-30, p=0.003) respectively in MSD; and 23% (18-30, reference), 17% (12-26; p=0.2), and 19% (14-26; p=0.6) respectively in MUD. Consistent with our previous findings, within the PTCy/Tac group, MMF was not associated with the overall rate of cGvHD in MSD (HR=1.2, 95% CI 0.6-2.1, p=0.6) or MUD (HR=1.3, 95% CI 0.7-2.2, p=0.4). However, in the current study, stratified analyses performed to evaluate the impact of prophylaxis on the risk of de novo vs progressive/relapsing cGvHD revealed a potential role for MMF in the development of de novo cGvHD. Subsequent results are presented separately for the de novo and progressive/relapsing cGvHD risk cohorts (Table). The de novo cGvHD risk cohort included patients (N=442) who had not been diagnosed with aGvHD within 3 mo post-SCT. AML / MDS (60%) and CML / MPD (16%) were the most common diagnoses. 124 cases of cGvHD were diagnosed 3 -36 mo post-SCT with a CumInc of32% (27-37). In multivariate analysis (MVA), compared to Tac/MTX, the use of PTCy/Tac without MMF (HR=0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.6, p<0.001) was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of cGvHD. Such reduction was not observed (Figure) with PTCy/Tac with MMF (HR vs Tac/MTX=1.0, 95% CI 0.6-1.5, p=0.9). Additional independent predictors were myeloablative conditioning (HR=1.9, 95% CI 1.3-2.9, p=0.001) and MSD (HR=1.5, 95% CI 1.2-2.6, p=0.003). Notably, progression-free survival (PFS) was similar in PTCy/Tac/MMF (univariate HR: 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.4, p=0.4) vs PTCy/Tac. The progressive/relapsing cGvHD risk cohort included patients (N=450) who had been diagnosed with grade 1 (27%), 2 (59%) or 3-4 (14%) aGvHD within 3 mo post-SCT. AML / MDS (64%) and CML / MPD (14%) were the most common diagnoses. 109 cases of cGvHD were diagnosed 3 -36 mo post-SCT with a CumInc of 28% (24-33). In MVA analysis, the impact of prophylaxis differed by donor type. As compared with Tac/MTX, PTCy/Tac ± MMF was associated with significantly lower rate of progressive/relapsing cGVHD in MSD (HR=0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.4, p<0.001) but not in MUD (HR=0.6, 95% CI 0.4-1.1, p=0.09). This may be related to the use of ATG with Tac/MTX in MUD which was not used in MSD. HCT-CI ≥3 was the only other significant predictor of cGvHD (HR=0.6, 0.4-0.9, p=0.03). PFS was similar in PTCy/Tac ± MMF vs Tac/MTX in MSD (univariate HR: 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.3, p=0.3) or MUD (univariate HR: 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.2, p=0.3). Conclusions: PTCy/Tac ± MMF prophylaxis slows the development of progressive/relapsing cGvHD in MSD vs (Tac/MTX no ATG), but not in MUD (vs Tac/MTX with ATG). The addition of MMF to PTCy/Tac (vs PTCy/Tac) has no significant impact on the risk of progressive/relapsing cGVHD in MSD or MUD; but is associated with a higher risk of de novo cGvHD in MSD and MUD. Our data suggest that multi-center studies are warranted to determine whether MMF should be excluded from cGvHD prevention regimens in the HLA-matched donor setting with PTCy- based GvHD prophylaxis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".