Donor Type Does Not Impact Late Graft Failure Following Reduced-Intensity Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation with Post-Transplant Cyclophosphamide-Based Graft-Versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is a commonly used graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis, particularly in the setting of haploidentical (haplo) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). The rate of graft failure has been reported to be as high as 12% to 20% in haplo-HCT recipients using PTCy. The objective of this study was to determine whether donor type influenced the risk of late graft failure following reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) HCT using PTCy-based GVHD prophylaxis. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort analysis using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) database among adult patients who underwent first RIC haplo or 8/8 matched unrelated donor (MUD) HCT between 2011 and 2018 for acute myeloblastic leukemia (AML), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with PTCy GVHD prophylaxis. The primary outcome was incidence of late graft failure, defined as secondary graft loss in the absence of relapse or poor graft function requiring a cellular therapy intervention. RESULTS: A total of 1336 patients met the eligibility criteria (1151 haplo, 185 MUD). Patients in the MUD group were older (65 vs. 61 years), less ethnically diverse (95% vs. 72% White), received fewer bone marrow grafts (45% vs. 16%), and had younger donors (median age, 28 vs. 37 years old). Conditioning regimens were predominately fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and total body irradiation (TBI; 87% haplo and 38% MUD). At 2 years, the adjusted probabilities of late graft failure for the haplo group was 6.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.2-8.0) versus 5.9% (95% CI, 2.7%-10.9%) for the MUD group (P = .79). Multivariate analysis for risk factors associated with late graft failure found associations with a diagnosis of MDS (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.22-3.20; P = .005), and earlier year of HCT (2015-2018 vs. 2011-2014; HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.64; P = .0002). A post-hoc sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of donor age and use of peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) grafts. Graft failure did not differ between haplo and MUD HCT (HR, 1.19; P = .67) when adjusted for donor age nor when restricted to PBSC grafts only (HR, 0.85; P = .70). CONCLUSION: In this registry-based analysis of patients undergoing RIC HCT for AML, ALL, or MDS using GVHD prophylaxis with PTCy, there was no significant difference in late graft failure rates between haplo and MUD donors. Overall rates of late graft failure were high.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".