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.
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 moreThe 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 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.
Bookmark this article
During the 61st American Society of Hematology (ASH) meeting, Orlando, US, the GvHD Hub were pleased to host a discussion between James Ferrara and Hrishikesh Srinagesh, both from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, US, on what is the best way to measure response to GvHD treatment?
Hrishikesh Srinagesh talks about two recently validated biomarkers to measure GvHD severity. He also discusses his study that explored if the Mount Sinai Acute GvHD International Consortium (MAGIC) algorithm probability (MAP) could successfully predict long-term outcomes.
What is the best way to measure response to GvHD treatment?
Subscribe to get the best content related to GvHD delivered to your inbox