Citations

AbstractObjectiveHLA‐DPB1 matching may impact allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) outcomes; however, this locus is not in linkage disequilibrium with the remainder of the HLA genes. After classifying HLA‐DPB1 mismatches based on T‐cell epitope, avoiding non‐permissive mismatches may impact survival. We tested this hypothesis at a single academic institution.MethodsRetrospective HLA‐DPB1 genotyping was performed on 153 adult patients who underwent ASCT and unrelated donors matched for HLA‐A, B, C, DRB1, and DQB1 loci (10/10). Using the ImMunoGeneTics/HLA T‐cell epitope matching algorithm, mismatch status was classified as permissive or non‐permissive.ResultsOf 153 donor‐recipient pairs, 22 (14.4%) were HLA‐DPB1 matches, 64 (42.8%) permissive mismatches, and 67 (43.8%) non‐permissive mismatches. DPB1 mismatch increased risk of chronic graft‐versus‐host disease (cGVHD; RR 2.89 [1.19‐9.53], P=.016) compared with DPB1‐matched transplants, but there were no differences in overall mortality, risk of relapse, or acute GVHD (aGVHD). Combining matches and permissive mismatches and comparing to non‐permissive mismatches, there was no significant difference in overall survival or relapse; however, patients receiving non‐permissive mismatched transplants experienced greater risk of aGVHD overall and severe aGVHD (RR 1.66 [1.13‐2.44], P=.010 and RR 1.97 [1.10‐3.59], P=.024, respectively).ConclusionIn this single‐center study, HLA‐DPB1 matching influenced outcomes of patients undergoing ASCT for hematologic malignancy.

BACKGROUNDABO incompatibility is not a contraindication to hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), but it has been associated with additional risks including delayed engraftment, pure red cell aplasia (PRCA), and higher transfusion needs. Data on these events and on patient survival after reduced‐intensity conditioning (RIC) HCT are limited.STUDY DESIGN AND METHODSA total of 127 consecutive patients, 86 with acute myeloid leukemia and 41 with myelodysplastic syndromes, who underwent HLA‐matched peripheral blood RIC allogenic HCT between 2005 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed.RESULTSEighty ABO‐compatible, 26 major/bidirectional, and 21 minor‐ABO‐mismatch HCT were identified. Compared to the ABO‐compatible group, major/bidirectional mismatches had increased red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirement during the first 100 days (p = 0.009), delayed RBC and PLT engraftment (p = 0.0011 and p = 0.005, respectively), and higher incidence of grade II to IV acute graft‐versus‐host disease (aGVHD; p = 0.037). In multivariable analysis, major/bidirectional mismatches had significantly higher non‐relapse mortality (NRM) and inferior disease‐free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with ABO‐compatible patients (p = 0.01, p = 0.04, and p = 0.035, respectively). Minor ABO mismatch had no impact on survival (p = 0.99). Four (15%) of 26 major/bidirectional mismatches developed PRCA. There was a significant association between fludarabine plus busulfan conditioning and PRCA (p = 0.0046).CONCLUSIONMajor/bidirectional ABO mismatch is associated with higher NRM and shortened DFS and OS in the setting of RIC HCT. Increased transfusion need, delayed RBC and platelet engraftment, PRCA, and increased severity of aGVHD are additional complications contributing to the morbidity.

BackgroundThe use of hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) transplant has risen over the past two decades. A variety of adverse events (AEs) of varying severity have been noted during HPC infusions. These AEs have been associated with several factors such as the amount of dimethyl sulfoxide and white blood cells in the HPC product. We performed a single‐institution retrospective analysis to determine the effect of two different HPC infusion techniques, manual push with syringes versus infusion from bags with the aid of gravity, on the occurrence of infusion‐related AEs.Study Design and MethodsInfusions between December 2008 and November 2010 involving peripheral blood HPCs were reviewed. Pertinent clinical and HPC product–related information was recorded. Data were analyzed to determine the incidence of infusion‐related AEs and its association with patient and product‐related variables.ResultsWe found 461 AEs in 645 patients during the study period. A total of 325 (50%) experienced at least one AE. Flushing was the most common type of AE followed by nausea and hypertension. The use of syringe infusion was more commonly associated with AEs (odds ratio, 1.82 [95% confidence interval, 1.32‐2.50]; p = 0.002). Other independent risk factors were cryopreserved products and the amount of polymorphonuclear leukocytes in the product.ConclusionTo our knowledge, this is the first study examining the effect of two different infusion techniques on infusion‐related AEs. Our findings suggest that the use of bags for infusion protected the patients from AEs.

BackgroundThe cold agglutinin (CAGG) titer is offered at our institution to aid in diagnosing cold agglutinin disease (CAD). Our goal was to create a seasonally adjusted reference range using prospective samples and compare it to a reference range generated retrospectively.Study Design and MethodsProspective CAGG titer testing was performed on healthy blood donors. Retrospective electronic analysis was performed on patients in two groups defined by current and historical testing methods. Blood donor testing was performed in January and July to determine if seasonal variation existed. Retrospective patients with conditions associated with CAD were excluded from analysis. Additional prospective CAGG testing using reference range program volunteers was performed to verify blood donor and patient result differences.ResultsTiters from the blood donor and patient cohorts had no age association (p > 0.44). Titers from those same cohorts did not show winter/summer variation (p > 0.11). No sex association was found with titer reference ranges in the blood donor and historical patient cohort. A sex association was found with titers in the current method patient cohort (male 64 to 512 and female ≤64; p < 0.0001). Blood donor CAGG titer lower 95% reference range was not more than 4 while historical and current patient cohorts ranges were not more than 32 and not more than 64, respectively. Reference range volunteers confirmed the narrow reference range in healthy individuals when compared to patients and blood donors.ConclusionProspective blood donor CAGG titers were lower than retrospective patient cohorts. This may be due to blood donors representing a healthier population than the patient cohorts.

Case ReportA 50‐year‐old male with T‐cell lymphoma presented for autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. After granulocyte–colony‐stimulating factor (G‐CSF) mobilization, his peripheral blood CD34+ cell count was 166 × 106/L on the day before collection, which predicted a high yield of CD34+ cells in the apheresis product. The first two collections had yields much lower than expected, triggering an investigation and changes to the apheresis collection methods since mobilization appeared adequate from the peripheral CD34+ values.ResultsChanges to the apheresis collection variables and instrumentation did not improve the yields in the next three collections. The laboratory investigation demonstrated that there was an interfering substance in the patient's plasma that was causing falsely high peripheral blood CD34+ cell values and that the low CD34+ cell yields in the collections were consistent with the actual peripheral blood CD34+ cell value. Based on this finding and after discussion with the clinical service, the patient then received plerixafor to increase the number of circulating CD34+ cells before Collections 6 and 7. The patient went on to achieve the target CD34+ cell dose and subsequently underwent a successful autologous transplant with full hematopoietic engraftment.ConclusionThis case demonstrates the importance of timely and critical review of laboratory results in the context of the specific patient. This case exemplifies how diligent review of laboratory results and open communication among the various teams can positively affect patient outcomes.