How risky is a second allogeneic stem cell transplantation?

There is no consensus on second allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) indications in patients with hematologic malignancies relapsing after a first alloSCT. In historic publications, a very high non-relapse mortality (NRM) has been described, arguing against performing a second alloSCT. We analysed the outcome of 3356 second alloSCTs performed 2011-21 following a hematologic malignancy relapse. Outcomes at two years after second alloSCT were: NRM 22%, relapse incidence 50%, overall survival 38%, and progression-free survival 28%. Key risk factors for increased NRM were: older age, low performance score, high disease-risk-index, early relapse after the first alloSCT, unrelated/haploidentical donor, and GVHD before second alloSCT. Any type of GVHD after first alloSCT was also important risk factor for acute GVHD and chronic GVHD after second alloSCT. There was a preferential use of a different donor (80%) at second alloSCT from first alloSCT. However, in multivariate analysis, the use of the same alloSCT donor for second alloSCT vs. a different donor was not associated with any of the survival or GVHD endpoints. We show considerably improved outcome as compared to historic reports. These current data support a wider use of second alloSCT and provide risk factors for NRM that need to be considered.

Patient engagement in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and cell therapy: a survey by the EBMT patient engagement task force & transplantation complications working party.

The EBMT (European Blood and Marrow Transplantation Society) aims to connect patients, the scientific community, and other stakeholders to improve hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and cellular therapy outcomes. We performed a cross-sectional online survey to understand the perceptions regarding Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient Active Involvement in Research (PAIR) in over 800 stakeholders (n = 813). Patients (n = 278) and health care professionals (HCPs) (n = 351) were compared. We observed high openness for EBMT PRO collection (n = 680, 84.5% across stakeholders' groups; patients n = 256, 93.1% versus HCPs n = 273, 78.4% [p < 0.001]) and PAIR (n = 702, 87.3% across stakeholder groups; patients n = 256, 92.4% versus HCPs n = 296, 85.8% [p = 0.009]), with a significantly higher proportion of patients expressing interest compared to HCPs. Priority domains for PROs data-collection identified were the assessment of symptom experience, psychosocial and cognitive functioning. The most important issues for patients specifically were the data-collection of PROs reflecting cognitive function, the option of reporting data at home, the importance of identifying actionable targets to improve their recovery, and receiving feedback on their input when participating in research projects. Our multistakeholder approach suggests an added value to embracing patient engagement in the development of meaningful research and service design within the transplantation and cellular therapy community.

Management of complications of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy: a report by the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

CAR-T cells are in standard clinical use to treat relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies, such as non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, multiple myeloma and acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Owing to the rapidly progressing field of CAR-T cell therapy and the lack of generally accepted treatment guidelines, we hypothesized significant differences between European centers in prevention, diagnosis and management of short- and long-term complications. To capture the current CAR-T cell management among EBMT centers and to determine the medical need and specific areas for future clinical research the EBMT Transplant Complications Working Party performed a survey among 227 EBMT CAR-T cell centers. We received complete servey answers from 106 centers (47%) addressing questions in the areas of product selection, CAR-T cell logistics, management of cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome as well as management in later phases including prolonged cytopenias. We identified common patterns in complication management, but also significant variety in clinical management of the centers in important aspects. Our results demonstrate a high medical need for treatment harmonization and future clinical research in the following areas: treatment of steroid-refractory and very severe CRS/neurotoxicity, treatment of cytopenia, early discharge and outpatient management, as well as immunoglobulin substitution.

ATG or post-transplant cyclophosphamide to prevent GVHD in matched unrelated stem cell transplantation?

There is a high risk of GVHD and non-relapse mortality (NRM) after allogeneic stem cell transplantations (alloSCT) from unrelated donors. Prophylaxis with rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (rATG) is standard in Europe but post-transplantation Cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is an emerging alternative. We analyzed outcomes of rATG (n = 7725) vs. PTCy (n = 1039) prophylaxis in adult patients with hematologic malignancies undergoing peripheral blood alloSCT from 10/10 antigen-matched unrelated donors (MUD) between January 2018 and June 2021 in the EBMT database. The provided P-values and hazard ratios (HR) are derived from multivariate analysis. Two years after alloSCT, NRM in the PTCy group was 12.1% vs. 16.4% in the rATG group; p = 0.016; HR 0.72. Relapse was less frequent after PTCy vs. rATG (22.8% vs. 26.6%; p = 0.046; HR 0.87). Overall survival after PTCy was higher (73.1% vs. 65.9%; p = 0.001, HR 0.82). Progression free survival was better after PTCy vs. rATG (64.9% vs. 57.2%; p < 0.001, HR 0.83). The incidence of chronic GVHD was lower after PTCy (28.4% vs. rATG 31.4%; p = 0.012; HR 0.77), whereas the incidence and severity of acute GVHD were not significantly different. GVHD-free relapse-free survival was significantly higher in the PTCy arm compared to the rATG arm (2 y incidence: 51% vs. 45%; HR: 0.86 [95% CI 0.75-0.99], p = 0.035). In the absence of evidence from randomized controlled trials, our findings support a preference for the use of PTCy in adult recipients of peripheral blood alloSCTs from MUD.

PTCy versus ATG as graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis in mismatched unrelated stem cell transplantation.

There is an increased risk of GVHD and of non-relapse mortality (NRM) after allogeneic stem cell transplantations (alloSCT) when mismatched unrelated donors (MMUD) are used. In Europe, it is standard practice to use rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (rATG) to reduce the high NRM and GVHD risks after MMUD alloSCT. As an alternative to rATG, post-transplantation Cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is in increasing clinical use. It is currently impossible to give general recommendations regarding preference for one method over another since comparative evidence from larger data sets is lacking. To improve the evidence base, we analyzed the outcome of rATG vs. PTCy prophylaxis in adult patients with hematologic malignancies undergoing first peripheral blood alloSCT from MMUD (9/10 antigen match) between Jan 2018 and June 2021 in the database of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT). We performed multivariate analyses using the Cox proportional-hazards regression model. We included 2123 patients in the final analyses (PTCy, n = 583; rATG, n = 1540). p values and hazard ratios (HR) presented here are multivariate outcomes. Two years after alloSCT we found a lower NRM in the PTCy group of 18% vs. 24.9% in the rATG group; p = 0.028, HR 0.74. Overall survival in the PTCy cohort was higher with 65.7% vs. 55.7% in the rATG cohort; p < 0.001, HR 0.77. Progression-free survival was also better in the PTCy patients with 59.1% vs. 48.8% when using rATG; p = 0.001, 0.78. The incidences of chronic GVHD and acute GVHD were not significantly different between the groups. We found significantly lower NRM as well as higher survival in recipients of peripheral blood alloSCTs from MMUD receiving PTCy as compared to rATG. The results of the current analysis suggest an added value of PTCy as GVHD prophylaxis in MMUD alloSCT.

ECP versus ruxolitinib in steroid-refractory chronic GVHD - a retrospective study by the EBMT transplant complications working party.

Ruxolitinib has become the new standard of care for steroid-refractory and steroid-dependent chronic GVHD (SR-cGVHD). Our aim was to collect comparative data between ruxolitinib and extracorporeal photophoresis (ECP). We asked EBMT centers if they were willing to provide detailed information on GVHD grading, -therapy, -dosing, -response and complications for each included patient. 31 centers responded positively and we included all patients between 1/2017-7/2019 treated with ECP or ruxolitinib for moderate or severe SR-cGVHD. We identified 84 and 57 patients with ECP and ruxolitinib, respectively. We performed multivariate analyses adjusted on grading and type of SR-cGVHD (steroid dependent vs. refractory vs. intolerant to steroids). At day+180 after initiation of treatment for SR-cGVHD the odds ratio in the ruxolitinib group to achieve overall response vs. the ECP group was 1.35 (95% CI = [0.64; 2.91], p = 0.43). In line, we detected no statistically significant differences in overall survival, progression-free survival, non-relapse mortality and relapse incidence. The clinical significance is limited by the retrospective study design and the current data can't replace prospective studies on ECP in SR-cGVHD. However, the present results contribute to the accumulating evidence on ECP as an effective treatment option in SR-cGVHD.

The impact of pre-transplantation diabetes and obesity on acute graft-versus-host disease, relapse and death after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: a study from the EBMT Transplant Complications Working Party.

Obesity and diabetes can modulate immune responses, which may impact allogeneic HCT outcomes and GvHD. From the EBMT registry, we included 36,539 adult patients who underwent allogeneic HCT for a hematological malignancy between 2016 and 2020. Of these, 5228 (14%) had obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2), 1415 (4%) had diabetes (requiring treatment with insulin or oral hypoglycemics), and 688 (2%) had obesity + diabetes pre-transplantation. Compared with patients without diabetes or obesity, the hazard ratio (HR) of grade II-IV acute GvHD was 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94-1.06, p = 0.89) for patients with obesity, 0.95 (CI 0.85-1.07, p = 0.43) for patients with diabetes, and 0.96 (CI 0.82-1.13, p = 0.63) for patients with obesity + diabetes. Non-relapse mortality was higher in patients with obesity (HR 1.08, CI 1.00-1.17, p = 0.047), diabetes (HR 1.40, CI 1.24-1.57, p < 0.001), and obesity + diabetes (HR 1.38, CI 1.16-1.64, p < 0.001). Overall survival after grade II-IV acute GvHD was lower in patients with diabetes (HR 1.46, CI 1.25-1.70, p < 0.001). Pre-transplantation diabetes and obesity did not influence the risk of developing acute GvHD, but pre-transplantation diabetes was associated with poorer survival after acute GvHD.

ECP versus ruxolitinib in steroid-refractory acute GVHD - a retrospective study by the EBMT transplant complications working party.

Introduction: Extracorporal Photophoresis (ECP) is in clinical use for steroid-refractory and steroid-dependent acute GVHD (SR-aGVHD). Based on recent Phase-III study results, ruxolitinib has become the new standard of care for SR-aGVHD. Our aim was to collect comparative data between ruxolitinib and ECP in SR-aGVHD in order to improve the evidence base for clinical decision making. Methods: We asked EBMT centers if they were willing to participate in this study by completing a data form (Med-C) with detailed information on GVHD grading, -therapy, -dosing, -response and complications for each included patient. Results: 31 centers responded positively (14%) and we included all patients receiving alloSCT between 1/2017-7/2019 and treated with ECP or ruxolitinib for SR-aGVHD grades II-IV from these centers. We identified 53 and 40 patients with grades II-IV SR-aGVHD who were treated with ECP and ruxolitinib, respectively. We performed multivariate analyses adjusted on grading and type of SR-aGVHD (steroid dependent vs. refractory). At day+90 after initiation of treatment for SR-aGVHD we found no statistically significant differences in overall response. The odds ratio in the ruxolitinib group to achieve overall response vs. the ECP group was 1.13 (95% CI = [0.41; 3.22], p = 0.81). In line, we detected no statistically significant differences in overall survival, progression-free survival, non-relapse mortality and relapse incidence. Discussion: The clinical significance is limited by the retrospective study design and the current data can't replace prospective studies on ECP in SR-aGVHD. However, the present results contribute to the accumulating evidence on ECP as an effective treatment option in SR-aGVHD.