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
Prediction of response and long-term outcomes of second-line therapy for patients with aGvHD: A MAGIC analysis
|
An analysis evaluating the association between the Mount Sinai Acute Graft-versus-Host Disease (aGvHD) International Consortium (MAGIC) algorithm probabilities (MAP), measured at the initiation of second-line therapy, and Day 28 response and long-term outcomes, in patients with aGvHD, was published in Blood Advances by DeFilipp et al.1 Clinical data and serum samples from 167 patients who received second-line systematic treatment for aGvHD between January 2016 and December 2021 were analyzed from the MAGIC database and biorepository.1 |
| Key learnings: |
| Compared with other second-line therapies for aGvHD, ruxolitinib was associated with improved outcomes (Day 28 overall response: 55% vs 31%, p = 0.003; 2-year non-relapse mortality [NRM] point estimates: 12% vs 41%; 2-year overall survival [OS] point estimates: 79% vs 52%); however, this benefit was limited to patients with low MAP. |
| For lower-risk patients (low MAP) at initiation of second-line therapy, ruxolitinib should be considered standard of care; however, for higher-risk patients (high MAP), exploring new therapies or combination treatments in clinical trials is warranted to improve outcomes. |
| Therefore, MAP at initiation of second-line therapy for aGVHD is a significant predictor of NRM and overall survival (OS). |
| Overall, despite the study’s retrospective nature and limited sample size, these findings suggest that integrating MAP into clinical practice could personalize treatment approaches for aGVHD, optimizing therapeutic strategies and improving patient outcomes. |
| In addition, incorporating MAP into clinical trial designs for steroid-refractory aGVHD could enhance the relevance of trial outcomes, particularly in non-randomized studies. |
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
