Citations

AbstractConvalescent plasma, collected from donors who have recovered from a pathogen of interest, has been used to treat infectious diseases, particularly in times of outbreak, when alternative therapies were unavailable. The COVID‐19 pandemic revived interest in the use of convalescent plasma. Large observational studies and clinical trials that were executed during the pandemic provided insight into how to use convalescent plasma, whereby high levels of antibodies against the pathogen of interest and administration early within the time course of the disease are critical for optimal therapeutic effect. Several studies have shown outpatient administration of COVID‐19 convalescent plasma (CCP) to be both safe and effective, preventing clinical progression in patients when administered within the first week of COVID‐19. The United States Food and Drug Administration expanded its emergency use authorization (EUA) to allow for the administration of CCP in an outpatient setting in December 2021, at least for immunocompromised patients or those on immunosuppressive therapy. Outpatient transfusion of CCP and infusion of monoclonal antibody therapies for a highly transmissible infectious disease introduces nuanced challenges related to infection prevention. Drawing on our experiences with the clinical and research use of CCP, we describe the logistical considerations and workflow spanning procurement of qualified products, infrastructure, staffing, transfusion, and associated management of adverse events. The purpose of this description is to facilitate the efforts of others intent on establishing outpatient transfusion programs for CCP and other antibody‐based therapies.

Abstract Genomic classification has improved risk assignment of pediatric, but not adult B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). The international UKALLXII/ECOG-ACRIN E2993 (#NCT00002514) trial accrued 1229 adolescent/adult patients with BCR-ABL1− B-ALL (aged 14 to 65 years). Although 93% of patients achieved remission, 41% relapsed at a median of 13 months (range, 28 days to 12 years). Five-year overall survival (OS) was 42% (95% confidence interval, 39, 44). Transcriptome sequencing, gene expression profiling, cytogenetics, and fusion polymerase chain reaction enabled genomic subtyping of 282 patient samples, of which 264 were eligible for trial, accounting for 64.5% of E2993 patients. Among patients with outcome data, 29.5% with favorable outcomes (5-year OS 65% to 80%) were deemed standard risk (DUX4-rearranged [9.2%], ETV6-RUNX1/-like [2.3%], TCF3-PBX1 [6.9%], PAX5 P80R [4.1%], high-hyperdiploid [6.9%]); 50.2% had high-risk genotypes with 5-year OS of 0% to 27% (Ph-like [21.2%], KMT2A-AFF1 [12%], low-hypodiploid/near-haploid [14.3%], BCL2/MYC-rearranged [2.8%]); 20.3% had intermediate-risk genotypes with 5-year OS of 33% to 45% (PAX5alt [12.4%], ZNF384/-like [5.1%], MEF2D-rearranged [2.8%]). IKZF1 alterations occurred in 86% of Ph-like, and TP53 mutations in patients who were low-hypodiploid (54%) and BCL2/MYC-rearranged (33%) but were not independently associated with outcome. Of patients considered high risk based on presenting age and white blood cell count, 40% harbored subtype-defining genetic alterations associated with standard- or intermediate-risk outcomes. We identified distinct immunophenotypic features for DUX4-rearranged, PAX5 P80R, ZNF384-R/-like, and Ph-like genotypes. These data in a large adult B-ALL cohort treated with a non–risk-adapted approach on a single trial show the prognostic importance of genomic analyses, which may translate into future therapeutic benefits.