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 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 grants from Sanofi and Therakos. The 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
Create an account and access these new features:
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View gvhd content recommended for you
Comparison of three GvHD prophylaxis regimens post-haploSCT
|
In patients undergoing haploSCT, the standard GvHD prophylaxis used after PTCy is CNI + MMF. However, studies have found promising results with the use of single-agent tacrolimus, and sirolimus + MMF prophylaxis. Recently a study published in Transplantation and Cellular Therapy retrospectively analyzed and compared the incidence of GvHD and survival outcomes with three GvHD prophylaxis strategies in adults undergoing haploSCT across five centers in Spain:
|
| Key learnings |
| Multivariate analysis showed no significant differences in the incidence of grade II–IV aGvHD between patients who received single-agent tacrolimus, CNI + MMF, or sirolimus + MMF (20%, 25%, and 30%, respectively; p = 0.08) or grade III–IV aGvHD (9%, 6%, and 15%, respectively; p = 0.12) at 100 days. |
| Use of single-agent tacrolimus was associated with a lower incidence (p = 0.001) of cGvHD at 34 months (24%) compared with CNI + MMF (47%) and sirolimus + MMF (52%). |
| There were no differences in 3-year OS, PFS, NRM, or relapse rates observed between groups; DRI low-intermediate, HCT-CI <2, and EBMT <3 pretransplantation scores significantly impacted OS and PFS similarly between treatment groups. |
| All three prophylactic strategies gave similar survival outcomes; therefore, sirolimus + MMF may be a viable option for patients intolerant to CNI. The reduced risk of cGvHD noted with single-agent tacrolimus is a potential area of further investigation. |
Abbreviations: aGvHD, acute GvHD; CNI, calcineurin inhibitors; cGvHD, chronic GvHD; DRI, Disease Risk Index; EBMT, European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation; GvHD, graft-versus-host disease; HCT-CI, Hematopoietic Stem Cell-Specific Comorbidity Index; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil; non-relapse mortality; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; PTCy, post-transplant cyclophosphamide.
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
