Racial Disparity in Outcomes after Myeloablative Conditioning for Hematological Malignancies in Patients Above the Age of 45 Years Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The impact of race on outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplants (HCT) has long been a field of research. The Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) studies have shown worse survival for Blacks and Hispanics within the first year after HCT in the US (Morishima et al., 2022) but evened out for one-year survivors (Blue et al., 2023). We hypothesize that the outcomes of South Asians (age ≥ 45 years) receiving myeloablative conditioning in HCT for hematological malignancies are worse compared to other races and similar to that of Blacks (B). This is as per observations in South Asian regions where only reduced intensity conditioning is offered in this age group. British Columbia has a significant Asian population, with ~50% Whites (W), ~12% South Asians (SA) and 22% Other Asians (East Asians EA + South-East Asians SEA), which allows us to compare the HCT outcomes among these three racial groups. Methods: This was a single-centre retrospective study conducted at the Leukemia/ BMT Program in BC. All patients (Age ≥ 45 years) undergoing myeloablative conditioning for hematological malignancies from January 2011 to December 2022 were included. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were non-relapse mortality (NRM), incidence of grade 2-4 acute graft versus host disease (GVHD), moderate-severe chronic GVHD and relapse incidence (RI). The survival analysis was done using Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test. The GVHD, NRM and RI rates were calculated using the cumulative incidence of competing events and the Gray test. EZR was used for statistical analysis. Results: Of the 487 patients, there were 28 (5.7%) South Asians (SA), 73 (15%) Other Asians (EA/SEA), and 382 (78%) Whites (W). Four Blacks (B) with similar outcomes as South Asians were grouped (SA/B) for outcome comparisons. There was a lower proportion of recipients ≥ 60 years of age in Asians than the Whites (SA/B 19% and EA/SEA 14%, W 34%, p=0.001). The proportion of donors ≥30 years of age was higher in the Asians compared to the Whites (SA/B 72%, EA/SEA 70%, and W 61%, p=0.02). The three groups were comparable regarding the recipient and donor sex, body mass index, and performance status. However, the proportion of SA/B with HCT-CI ≥ 5 was significantly higher (SA/B 34%, EA/SEA 15%, and W 7%, p=0.002). While the proportions with matched blood groups were similar, there were fewer CMV mismatches among the Asians (SA/B 25%, EA/SEA 26%, and W 43%, p=0.009). There was no difference in the conditioning type (total-body irradiation) and CD34 cell dose. However, a lower proportion of SA/B received ATG/PTCy as GVHD prophylaxis (SA/B 34%, EA/SEA 42%, and W 45%, p=0.0009). The median OS was significantly shorter in SA/B (SA/B 13, EA/SEA 101 and W 64 months, p=0.02). The cumulative incidence of non-relapse mortality (NRM) was the highest in SA/B (SA/B 40%, EA/SEA 13.7% and W 16%, at two years, p=0.005). The cumulative incidence of acute and chronic graft versus host disease (GVHD) was not significantly different across the racial groups (p=0.6 and 0.7, respectively). The cumulative incidence of relapse was also not significantly different (p=0.6). Discussion: Our study confirms that South Asians/Blacks ages ≥45 have worse survival after myeloablative conditioning. Supportive care is unable to overcome the differences in the outcomes. The high NRM is probably due to differences in comorbidities, frailty and pharmacogenetics and needs to be studied prospectively in multicentre studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".