Impact of ABO blood group incompatibility on the outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: ABO and Rh compatibility are not required between the donor and recipient for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT). Although ABO incompatibility is not considered a contraindication in alloHSCT, its clinical outcomes are still doubtful. In this study, we analyzed the neutrophil and platelet recovery, graft versus host disease (GVHD), relapse rate, mortality rate, non-relapse mortality and survival in patients who underwent alloHSCT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and sixty four patients with hematological malignant diseases, aplastic anemia and inborn errors of metabolism or the immune system that received an alloHSCT in our HSC transplant center between the years of 2001 and 2018 were evaluated. RESULTS: Indications for alloHSCT included both hematological malignancies (n = 233), aplastic anemia (n = 25) and benign conditions (n = 6). Of these donor recipient pairs, there were 189 (71.6%) matches, 36 (13.6%) major, 29 (11%) minor and 10 (3.8%) bidirectional ABO mismatches. The seventy-four (41.6%) of the ABO match and 27 (38.6%) of the ABO mismatch patients developed GvHD. The 5-year overall survival (OS) was ABO match group and ABO mismatch group were 65% and 73%, respectively (p = 0.36). The 5-year diasease free survival (DFS) for ABO match group and ABO mismatch group were 60% and 69%, respectively (p = 0.17). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study showed that ABO mismatch did not seem to have a significant effect on major outcomes after alloHSCT, such as developing GVHD, relapse rate, mortality rate, DFS and OS. ABO incompatibility did not lead to delayed platelet and neutrophil engraftment after alloHSCT.

Therapeutic plasma exchange for refractory SLE: A comparison of outcomes between different sub-phenotypes.

OBJECTIVE: Therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) offers an alternative therapeutic modality for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and primary antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). However, there is conflicting evidence regarding its efficacy in different sub-phenotypes. This study aimed to investigate the main clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with different phenotypes of SLE and APS treated with TPE at a tertiary care center. METHODS: The database of the Blood and Apheresis Unit between 2001 and 2013 was screened for patients with SLE and primary APS. SLE disease activity index (SELENA-SLEDAI), the indications for treatment, complications, and outcomes were obtained from a review of medical records and phone calls. A total of 24 patients (SLE: 20, APS: 4) were recruited for the study. RESULTS: Mean ages of SLE (M/F: 1/19) and primary APS (PAPS) patients (M/F: 2/2) were 32.4±12.89 and 52.0±10.7 years, respectively. The main indications for TPE were hematologic, neurologic, and pulmonary involvement and APS-related symptoms. TPE was preferred in eight patients because of leucopenia and co-infection. SLEDAI was significantly decreased after TPE (16.7±8.3 before vs. 8.8±3.1 after, p=0.001). Both primary APS and SLE-related catastrophic APS (CAPS) patients had completely responded to TPE. The success rate of TPE in patients with thrombocytopenia was lower than patients with hemolytic anemia. The median (IQR 25%-75%) number of TPE sessions was 6.5 (5-10.5). In total, five patients experienced TPE-related major adverse events (catheter infections in three patients, bleeding in one patient, and hypotension in one patient). The median (IQR 25%-75%) follow-up time was 33.5 (6.75-81.25) months. In total, four patients died during follow up, of which three died during the period of TPE administration. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that CAPS and other APS-related problems respond well to the TPE treatment. TPE should be kept in mind for the treatment of patients with other features of SLE, especially those resistant to other agents and in the presence of leucopenia.