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.

The GvHD Hub uses cookies on this website. They help us give you the best online experience. By continuing to use our website without changing your cookie settings, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our updated Cookie Policy

Introducing

Now you can personalise
your GvHD Hub experience!

Bookmark content to read later

Select your specific areas of interest

View content recommended for you

Find out more
  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.

Steering CommitteeAbout UsNewsletterContact
LOADING
You're logged in! Click here any time to manage your account or log out.
LOADING
You're logged in! Click here any time to manage your account or log out.

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.

2024-03-15T13:25:15.000Z

Navigating treatment sequencing of cGvHD: Real-world insights

Mar 15, 2024
Share:
Learning objective: After reading this article, learners will be able to cite a new clinical development in chronic graft-versus-host disease.

Bookmark this article

Chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGvHD) can present with complications of variable severity affecting the skin, fascia, liver, gastrointestinal tract, eyes, mouth, and lungs.1 Corticosteroids are the standard first-line treatment to treat these complications; however, subsequent treatment options after first-line therapy are unclear, due to high levels of uncontrolled immune response and treatment-induced toxicities.1

Here, we summarize key data regarding real-world treatment sequencing at Canadian transplant centers, published by Kim et al.1 in Transplantation Proceedings.

Study design1

  • A retrospective study of adult patients with cGvHD who received allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation greater than 18 months before data collection, from seven Canadian transplant centers, between September–November 2022.
  • Data variables included patient characteristics, cGvHD complications information and management, and physician-reported healthcare resource utilization.
  • Median values and interquartile ranges (IQR) were presented if data was not normally distributed.

Key findings1

  • In total, 77 patients with a median age of 52 were included in this study.
  • Overall, 99% of patients received prednisone at some point during cGvHD treatment, as shown in Table 1. The median current dose was 27.5 mg/day (IQR, 8.5–35.0).

Table 1. Treatment received by patients with GvHD*

Treatments ever given (may be in combination)

All patients
(n = 77)

Prednisone

76 (99%)

Ruxolitinib

41 (53%)

Cyclosporine

29 (38%)

Tacrolimus

22 (29%)

Mycophenolate (as MMF or MPA)

16 (22%)

ECP

13 (17%)

Imatinib

6 (8%)

Rituximab

5 (6%)

Ibrutinib

3 (4%)

Sirolimus

3 (4%)

Other
(includes azathioprine, etanercept, FAM, and methotrexate)

12 (16%)

ECP, extracorporeal photopheresis; FAM, fluticasone azithromycin montelukast; GvHD, graft-versus-host disease; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil; MPA, mycophenolic acid.
*Data from Dennis, et al.1

  • First-line treatment of prednisone was paired with calcineurin inhibitors. 28% of patients received the cyclosporine combination and 16% received the tacrolimus combination.
  • Ruxolitinib was the most common second-line therapy (37%), followed by mycophenolate mofetil/mycophenolic acid (17%).
  • Among patients still on active systemic therapy (n = 59), prednisone and ruxolitinib were equally common at 47%.
  • The most common third-line therapy was ruxolitinib (47%), again followed by mycophenolate mofetil/mycophenolic acid (17%).
  • Overall, 80% of patients with cGvHD received ≤3 lines of therapy, and patients received ≥3 lines of therapy when lung complications (41%) or scleroderma (77%) were involved (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Lines of therapy received by patients with cGvHD and those with lung involvement or scleroderma* 

cGvHD, chronic graft-versus-host disease.
*Adapted from Dennis, et al.1

  • During the management of serious complications, follow-up appointments were required more frequently than in the absence of serious complications, 14 days (IQR 7–16) and 61 days (IQR 28–84), respectively.

Key learnings1

  • Treatment sequencing following challenges of first-line therapy is highly varied, reflecting a lack of effective treatment options and/or unequal access to treatments.
  • Current treatment options do not adequately control cGvHD complications resulting in an increased strain on the healthcare system.
  • New treatments with fewer serious adverse effects are needed to better manage cGvHD.

  1. Dennis K, Taparia M, Robinson E, et al. Navigating the complexity of chronic graft-versus-host disease: Canadian insight into real-world treatment sequencing. Transplant Proc. 2024. Online ahead of print. DOI: 1016/j.transproceed.2023.12.021

Your opinion matters

HCPs, what is your preferred format for educational content on the GvHD Hub?
8 votes - 25 days left ...

Newsletter

Subscribe to get the best content related to GvHD delivered to your inbox