Gajewski, James

PURPOSE There is no consensus on the best choice of an alternative donor (umbilical cord blood [UCB], haploidentical, one-antigen mismatched [7/8]–bone marrow [BM], or 7/8-peripheral blood [PB]) for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for patients lacking an HLA-matched related or unrelated donor. METHODS We report composite end points of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD)–free relapse-free survival (GRFS) and chronic GVHD (cGVHD)–free relapse-free survival (CRFS) in 2,198 patients who underwent UCB (n = 838), haploidentical (n = 159), 7/8-BM (n = 241), or 7/8-PB (n = 960) HCT. All groups were divided by myeloablative conditioning (MAC) intensity or reduced intensity conditioning (RIC), except haploidentical group in which most received RIC. To account for multiple testing, P < .0071 in multivariable analysis and P < .00025 in direct pairwise comparisons were considered statistically significant. RESULTS In multivariable analysis, haploidentical group had the best GRFS, CRFS, and overall survival (OS). In the direct pairwise comparison of other groups, among those who received MAC, there was no difference in GRFS or CRFS among UCB, 7/8-BM, and 7/8-PB with serotherapy (alemtuzumab or antithymocyte globulin) groups. In contrast, the 7/8-PB without serotherapy group had significantly inferior GRFS, higher cGVHD, and a trend toward worse CRFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.38; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.69; P = .002) than the 7/8-BM group and higher cGVHD and trend toward inferior CRFS (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.63; P = .0006) than the UCB group. Among patients with RIC, all groups had significantly inferior GRFS and CRFS compared with the haploidentical group. CONCLUSION Recognizing the limitations of a registry retrospective analysis and the possibility of center selection bias in choosing donors, our data support the use of UCB, 7/8-BM, or 7/8-PB (with serotherapy) grafts for patients undergoing MAC HCT and haploidentical grafts for patients undergoing RIC HCT. The haploidentical group had the best GRFS, CRFS, and OS of all groups.

BACKGROUNDTo evaluate the impact of depression before autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) on clinical outcomes post‐transplantation.METHODSWe analyzed data from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research to compare outcomes after autologous (n = 3786) or allogeneic (n = 7433) HCT for adult patients with hematologic malignancies with an existing diagnosis of pre‐HCT depression requiring treatment versus those without pre‐HCT depression. Using Cox regression models, we compared overall survival (OS) between patients with or without depression. We compared the number of days alive and out of the hospital in the first 100 days post‐HCT using Poisson models. We also compared the incidence of grade 2‐4 acute and chronic graft‐versus‐host disease (GVHD) in allogeneic HCT.RESULTSThe study included 1116 (15%) patients with pre‐transplant depression and 6317 (85%) without depression who underwent allogeneic HCT between 2008 and 2012. Pre‐transplant depression was associated with lower OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04‐1.23; P = 0.004) and a higher incidence of grade 2‐4 acute GVHD (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.14‐1.37; P < 0.0001), but similar incidence of chronic GVHD. Pre‐transplant depression was associated with fewer days‐alive‐and‐out‐of‐the hospital (means ratio [MR] = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95‐0.99; P = 0.004). There were 512 (13.5%) patients with Pre‐transplant depression and 3274 (86.5%) without depression who underwent autologous HCT. Pre‐transplant depression in autologous HCT was not associated with OS (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.98‐1.34; P = 0.096) but was associated with fewer days alive and out of the hospital (MR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97‐0.99; P = 0.002).CONCLUSIONPre‐transplant depression was associated with lower OS and higher risk of acute GVHD among allogeneic HCT recipients and fewer days alive and out of the hospital during the first 100 days after autologous and allogeneic HCT. Patients with pre‐transplant depression represent a population that is at risk for post‐transplant complications. Cancer 2017;123:1828–1838. © 2017 American Cancer Society.