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 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

Post-transplant cyclophosphamide use in matched HLA donors

By Iqra Farooq

Share:

May 24, 2019


Studies in the haploidentical transplantation setting have demonstrated that post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) works by eliminating alloreactive T cells, while preserving the memory and regulatory T cells, resulting in less GvHD, better immune tolerance and less graft rejection.

While (PTCy) is widely and successfully used for the prevention of GvHD after haploidentical stem cell transplants (HSCT),1 only a few studies have looked at the use of PTCy for patients undergoing HLA-matched related (MRD) and matched unrelated (MUD) transplants.

Riad El Fakih, from the Department of Adult Hematology & Stem Cell Transplant, King Faisal Hospital & Research Center, Riyadh, SA and colleagues conducted a literature review2 from the PubMed and Cochrane databases, using the search terms, ‘post-transplant cyclophosphamide’ and ‘matched donors’. The team selected English language and peer-reviewed journals.

Use of PTCy after intensive conditioning transplants

The team reviewed a number of studies of intensive pre-transplant conditioning.

Study

N

Conditioning

Donor type

Graft

aGvHD

cGvHD

Luznik et al3

117

BU/CY

MRD

MUD

BM

II: 43%

III: 10%

-

Carnevale-Schianca et al4

35

Intensive

MRD: 10

MUD: 25

PB

II: 12%

Two year: 7%

Greco et al5

28

Diverse

MRD: 15

MUD: 13

PB

II: 23%

III: 4%

One year: 13%

Mielcarek et al6

43

BU/FLU

MRD: 12

MUD: 31

PB

II: 77%

One year: 16%

Acute leukemia working party EBMT7

423

Myeloablative/RIC

MRD: 241

MUD: 182

BM: 108

PB: 315

No significant difference

-

Table 1: Comparison of studies using PTCy after intensive conditioning

Use of PTCyafter reduced intensity conditioning (RIC)

Study

N

Conditioning

Donor type

Graft

aGvHD

cGvHD

NCT 02208037

92

RIC

MRD

MUD

PB

 

 

Solomon et al8

26

RIC: BU/FLU/CY

MRD: 17

MUD: 9

PB

II—IV: 46%

III—IV: 15%

 

Alousi et al9

49

BU/CY

MRD: 15

MUD: 34

PB: 11

BM: 38

II: 26

III: 11

N = 9

Moiseev et al10

86

RIC: 76%

MAC: 24%

MUD

PB

II—IV: 19%

III—IV: 4%

16%

Ruggari et al11

423

RIC: 42%

MAC: 54%

MRD: 241

MUD: 182

PB: 271

BM: 108

II—IV: 27.9%

One year: 33%

Table 2: Comparison of studies using PTCy after RIC

Discussion

The analysed literature suggests that PTCy reduces the incidence of both aGvHD, cGvHD, and GRFS compared with standard GvHD prophylaxis, without significantly increasing the risk of relapse. Adding calcineurin inhibitors may further reduce GvHD incidences after blood cell grafts.

The team elaborated on the limitations of their review; detailing how there are very few studies with high quality data, with most studies being uncontrolled, having few patients that have a variety of disease diagnoses and states. Often, the studies use differing donor types, graft types and conditioning regimens, and combine the use of cyclophosphamide with other immunosuppressant drugs. This makes it difficult to define the contribution of each drug to the observed outcomes.

Understanding with certainty whether PTCy is actually effective in the prevention or reduction of cGvHD or aGvHD, would require testing the hypothesis in randomized, double-blind clinical studies with large numbers of patients.

References