All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a healthcare professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit Know GvHD.

  TRANSLATE

The GvHD Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the GvHD Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The GvHD Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.

The GVHD Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Medac and supported through independent educational grants from Incyte, Sanofi and Therakos. Funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.

Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients

Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.

Find out more

Clinical predictors of response in cGvHD: Results from the PQRST trial

By Sheetal Bhurke

Share:

Aug 18, 2026

Learning objective: After reading this article, learners will be able to cite a new clinical development in chronic graft-versus-host disease.


Results from the prospective, observational Predicting the Quality of Response to Specific Treatments (PQRST) trial (NCT04431479), evaluating clinical predictors of treatment response in 181 patients with moderate-to-severe chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGvHD) requiring first-, second-, or third-line therapy, were published in the American Journal of Hematology by Hamilton et al. Clinical endpoints included best and 6-month response rates, failure-free survival (FFS), and clinical predictors of these responses.

Key data: The best responses rates were 72% by National Institutes of Health (NIH) criteria, 76% by clinician assessment, and 71% by patient-reported assessment. Response rates declined to ~40% at 6 months. FFS was 66% at 6 months and 41% at 18 months, and did not vary based on agent or line of therapy (LoT). Patient-reported fatigue measured by patient-reported outcomes measurement information system-29 (PROMIS-29; odds ratio [OR] 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5–0.9; p = 0.01) was the only clinical predictor of NIH response. A lower PROMIS physical health score was the only predictor of shorter FFS (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4–0.9; p = 0.02).

Key learning: Despite initial meaningful response rates, responses to contemporary cGvHD therapies are not durable across all agents and lines of therapy. Patient-reported fatigue and physical health measures represent the strongest clinical predictors of response and FFS, highlighting the need for integrating patient-reported outcomes into cGvHD management. 

References

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:

The content was clear and easy to understand

The content addressed the learning objectives

The content was relevant to my practice

I will change my clinical practice as a result of this content