Hematology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia-Hospitalet, IDIBELL, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
HonorHealth Cancer Transplant Institute, Scottsdale, Arizona.
Transplant Cell Ther. 2023 Mar;29(3):184.e1-184.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.jtct.2022.11.028. Epub 2022 Dec 25.
When using post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis for lymphoma patients, it is currently unknown whether a matched unrelated donor (MUD) or a haploidentical related donor is preferable if both are available. In this study we wanted to test whether using a haploidentical donor has the same results of a MUD. A total of 2140 adults (34% Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, 66% European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry) aged ≥18 years who received their first haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation (haplo-HCT) or MUD-HCT (8/8 match at HLA-loci A, B, C, and DRB1) for lymphoma using PTCy-based GVHD prophylaxis from 2010 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The majority of both MUD and haploidentical HCTs received reduced intensity/nonmyeloablative conditioning (74% and 77%, respectively) and used a peripheral blood stem cell graft (91% and 60%, respectively) and a 3-drug GVHD prophylaxis (PTCy + calcineurin inhibitor + MMF in 54% and 90%, respectively). Haploidentical HCT has less favorable results versus MUD cohort in terms of overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR= = 1.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-2.27; P < .001), progression-free survival (HR=1.39; 95% CI, 1.10-1.79; P = .008), nonrelapse mortality (HR = 1.93; 95% CI, 1.21-3.07; P = .006), platelet engraftment (HR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.59-0.80; P < .001), acute grade 2-4 GVHD incidence (HR = 1.65; 95% CI, 1.28-2.14; P < .001), and chronic GVHD (HR = 1.79; 95% CI, 1.30-2.48, P < .001). No significant differences were observed in terms of relapse and neutrophil engraftment. Adjusting for propensity score yielded similar results. Whenever MUD is available in a timely manner, it should be preferred over a haploidentical donor when using PTCy-based GVHD prophylaxis for patients with lymphoma.
当使用移植后环磷酰胺(PTCy)预防移植物抗宿主病(GVHD)治疗淋巴瘤患者时,如果两者都可用,目前尚不清楚匹配的无关供体(MUD)或半相合相关供体哪个更优。在这项研究中,我们想测试使用半相合供体是否与 MUD 有相同的结果。回顾性分析了 2010 年至 2019 年期间,2140 名年龄≥18 岁的成人(34%来自国际血液和骨髓移植研究中心,66%来自欧洲血液和骨髓移植协会登记处)接受了基于 PTCy 的 GVHD 预防治疗的首次半相合造血细胞移植(haplo-HCT)或 MUD-HCT(HLA 位点 A、B、C 和 DRB1 完全匹配),用于治疗淋巴瘤。大多数 MUD 和半相合 HCT 均接受了强度降低/非清髓性预处理(分别为 74%和 77%),使用外周血干细胞移植物(分别为 91%和 60%)和 3 种药物 GVHD 预防方案(分别为 54%和 90%使用 PTCy+钙调神经磷酸酶抑制剂+MMF)。与 MUD 队列相比,半相合 HCT 在总死亡率(风险比 [HR]=1.69;95%置信区间 [CI],1.30-2.27;P<0.001)、无进展生存期(HR=1.39;95%CI,1.10-1.79;P=0.008)、非复发死亡率(HR=1.93;95%CI,1.21-3.07;P=0.006)、血小板植入(HR=0.69;95%CI,0.59-0.80;P<0.001)、急性 2-4 级 GVHD 发生率(HR=1.65;95%CI,1.28-2.14;P<0.001)和慢性 GVHD(HR=1.79;95%CI,1.30-2.48,P<0.001)方面的结果较差。在复发和中性粒细胞植入方面未观察到显著差异。调整倾向评分后得到了类似的结果。在及时获得 MUD 的情况下,对于接受基于 PTCy 的 GVHD 预防治疗的淋巴瘤患者,应优先选择 MUD,而不是半相合供体。