Outcomes with low dose anti‐thymocyte globulin based graft versus host disease prophylaxis after mismatched unrelated donor allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) based graft versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis is widely used for mismatched unrelated donor allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) although optimal dose remains unclear. Although recent literature suggested improved outcomes with PTCy-based regimens when compared to ATG-based regimens these studies used doses of ATG ≥5 mg/kg. Thus, we analyzed outcomes of HLA 9/10 MMUD allogeneic HCTs using lower-dose ATG-based regimens at our center. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed outcomes of HLA 9/10 MMUD allogeneic HCTs using lower dose ATG-based regimens for all adults undergoing allogeneic HCT at The Ottawa Hospital from 2015 to 2022. Data regarding demographics, conditioning regimen, dose of ATG, rates of GVHD, duration of remission, and survival, were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Seventy-seven (n = 77) patients (males 62.3%; median age 50 years) underwent allogeneic HCT from MMUD. Majority(81%; n = 63) received 2.5 mg/kg of rabbit ATG and remaining 18.2% (n = 14) received 4.5 mg/kg. Grade II-IV acute GVHD occurred in 24.7% (n = 19) while any chronic GVHD occurred in 32.5% (n = 25) patients. After a median follow-up of 21 months, relapse occurred in 28.6% of patients. Two-year OS, GRFS, CIR, and NRM were 60.6%, 45.3%, 16.9%, and 18.2% respectively. Dose of ATG (2.5 mg/kg vs. 4.5 mg/kg) was not associated with outcomes in either univariate or multivariate analyses. CONCLUSIONS: When compared to published studies using ATG doses ≥5 mg/kg, GVHD prophylaxis using lower dose ATG may potentially lead to improved outcomes in patients undergoing MMUD allogeneic HCT. Further studies are needed to directly compare lower dose ATG to PTCy-based regimens to determine ideal GVHD prophylaxis for these patients.
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".