Revisiting Cytomegalovirus Serology in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients (allo-HCTRs) with positive cytomegalovirus (CMV) serology may have false-positive results due to blood product transfusion-associated passive immunity. METHODS: This single-center cohort study included allo-HCTRs with negative baseline (at malignancy diagnosis) CMV serology and indeterminate/low-positive (CMV IgG titer, ≥0.6-<50 U/mL) pretransplant CMV serology with negative pretransplant plasma CMV DNAemia. The CMV status of those patients was reclassified from R+ to R- (CMVR- reclassification group). We compared those patients to allo-HCTRs with negative (CMV IgG titer <0.6 U/mL) pretransplant CMV IgG (CMVR- group). We describe the number and type of patients whose pretransplant CMV status was reclassified from indeterminate/positive to negative. We reviewed all plasma CMV DNAemia tests performed during the first 6 months posttransplant in both groups to assess the safety of this approach. RESULTS: Among 246 (84.5%) of 291 transplanted patients identified as CMVR+ pretransplant, 60 (24.4%) were reclassified from CMV serology indeterminate (N:10)/low-positive (N:50) to R-. Only 1 of 60 patients (1.67%) in the CMVR- reclassification group versus 3 of 44 (6.8%; P = .30) in the CMVR- group developed CMV DNAemia during the follow-up period. There were no significant differences in the number of CMV DNAemia tests performed, CMV DNAemia range, and time posttransplant between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: One of 4 allo-HCT CMVR+ may be falsely flagged as R+, with significant impact on donor selection and prophylaxis administration. A 2-step approach including CMV serology testing at hematologic malignancy diagnosis in allo-HCT candidates and careful review of pretransplant CMV IgG titers may help correctly classify CMV serology status.

Routine Infectious Disease Consultation Prior to an Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant.

Background: A transplant infectious disease (TID) assessment is essential to select recipients for an allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) and tailor prophylactic and empirical treatment recommendations. Methods: We performed a retrospective single-center study to describe our model of care based on a routine TID consultation prior to an allogeneic HCT between 2018 and 2022 in 292 adult (≥18-year-old) consecutive patients. We describe the performance of a TID consultation, arbitrarily defined as major (HCT postponement, procedure, cytomegalovirus [CMV] recipient serology reinterpretation) and minor interventions. Results: Overall, 765 interventions were observed in 257 of 292 (88%) patients: 88 of 765 (11.5%) major and 677 of 765 (88.5%) minor interventions. Among major interventions, HCT was postponed in 8 of 292 (2.7%) patients and a procedure was requested in 18 of 292 (6.2%) patients. The CMV recipient serostatus was changed from indeterminate/low-titer positive to negative in 60 of 292 (20.5%) patients. Among 677 minor interventions, there were 68 (8.8%) additional consultations with other services requested, 260 (33.7%) additional diagnostic tests requested, 102 (13.2%) additional treatments recommended, 60 (7.8%) non-CMV serology reinterpretations performed, 115 (14.9%) deviations from routine anti-infective prophylaxis, and 72 (9.3%) deviations from routine empirical antibiotic treatment recommendations in case of neutropenic fever. Conclusions: We are proposing a structured, clearly defined, and comprehensive pretransplant checklist for an effective assessment of infectious disease risks and complications prior to an allogeneic HCT. Further studies or experiences like ours could help to define a global strategy or new models of care to be implemented in HCT centers in the future.

Hepatitis E Virus Infection Epidemiology in Recipients of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant.

Among 292 recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (2018-2022), 64 (21.9%) tested positive for anti-hepatitis E virus (HEV) immunoglobulin G. Among 208 recipients tested by plasma/serum HEV polymerase chain reaction (2012-2022), 3 (1.4%) primary HEV infections were diagnosed; in 1 patient, plasma HEV polymerase chain reaction relapsed positive for 100 days. HEV infection remains rare albeit associated with persistent viral replication.

Defibrotide Shows Efficacy in the Prevention of Sinusoidal Obstruction Syndrome After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Retrospective Study.

Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS), also known as hepatic veno-occlusive disease (VOD), is a well-known complication of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) associated with a mortality rate of up to 85%.  Defibrotide has shown efficacy in treatment of SOS/VOD. Moreover, evidence exists supporting the efficacy of defibrotide as SOS/VOD prophylaxis. We have previously reported our single center experience on 52 HSCT recipients receiving defibrotide as SOS/VOD prophylaxis, which has shown that the patients did not develop any SOS/VOD under this prophylaxis. The aim of the present study was to see if we can confirm the previous results, mainly on the decrease incidence of SOS/VOD, as well as improve event-free survival (EFS) on a larger study population. We extended our previous study in a single-center retrospective analysis to include 237 consecutive patients (248 transplantations) who underwent transplantation between 1999 and 2009 for hematological diseases and receiving intravenous defibrotide as prophylaxis. This cohort was compared to 241 patients (248 transplantations) treated before 1999 or after 2009 when defibrotide prophylaxis was not routinely used in our center. Median follow-up for the study group was 10 (range 2-16) years and for the control group 2.7 (range 1-18) years. None of the 237 patients in the defibrotide group developed SOS/VOD. The cumulative incidence (CI) of SOS/VOD was 0% in the defibrotide group as compared to 4.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-8%; P= .00046) in the control group. There was also a better 1-year EFS with 38% (95% CI, 32%-44%) in the defibrotide group versus 28% (95% CI, 22%-34%) (P= .00969) and decreased cumulative incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) in the defibrotide group 31% (95% CI, 25%-37%) versus 42% (95% CI, 36%-48%) (P= .026). The 1-year overall survival, relapse incidence, and non-relapse mortality were not statistically different. Multivariable analysis, performed taking into account clinical factors known to influence the risk of SOS/VOD, confirmed the favorable impact of defibrotide on SOS/VOD (HR 1.38e-08 [95% CI, 3.28e-09-5.80e-08]; P< .00001). Conversely, multivariable analysis failed to confirm the impact of defibrotide on 1-year EFS or acute GvHD. This large retrospective study on SOS/VOD-prophylaxis with defibrotide suggests that this approach may be of benefit. These results need to be confirmed in a prospective randomized trial.

Evaluation of Disease Risk Comorbidity Index after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in a Cohort with Patients Undergoing Transplantation with In Vitro Partially T Cell Depleted Grafts.

Outcomes of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) are influenced by comorbidities, disease type, and status at transplantation. Several prognostic scores can be used, such as the disease risk index (DRI) or the hematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index (HCT-CI). Recently, a new prognostic tool, the disease risk comorbidity index (DRCI), combining the DRI and the HCT-CI, was published. The DRCI determines 6 patient groups (very low risk [VLR], low risk [LR], intermediate risk 1 [IR-1], intermediate risk 2 [IR-2], high risk [HiR], and very high risk [VHR]) with a significant predictive value for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), relapse incidence (RI), and graft-versus-host disease-free/relapse-free survival (GRFS). However, the DRCI has not been evaluated for patients allografted with partially in vitro T cell depleted (pTDEP) grafts. In our center, we offer pTDEP to reduce graft-versus-host disease for patients in complete remission at transplant time. In this retrospective study, we investigated the DRCI in 404 adult patients (including 37.6% pTDEP) undergoing a first HSCT for hematological malignancies from 2008 to 2018. Because of the small number of patients in LR, VLR and LR were combined for analysis. In the entire cohort, 2-year OS was 84.4% (95% CI, 71.6% to 97.2%) for LR, 61.6% (54.8% to 68.4%) for IR-1, 45.7% (33.3% to 58.1%) for IR-2, 31% (19.4% to 42.6%) for HiR, and 30.9% (14.5% to 47.3%) for VHR (P < .001). In addition, the DRCI was predictive of DFS, RI, and GRFS but not of nonrelapsed mortality and graft-versus-host disease. Our study confirms similar results with the original publication but gives less accurate prognosis information than the DRI and HCT-CI when used separately. In conclusion, the DRCI does not seem to offer more relevant information than the DRI and HCT-CI to help physicians and patients for the HSCT decision.