| 1. |
- Hong, Sanghee, et al.
(författare)
-
Community health status and outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in the United States
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Cancer. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0008-543X .- 1097-0142. ; 127:4, s. 609-618
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The association of community factors and outcomes after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) has not been comprehensively described. Using the County Health Rankings and Roadmaps (CHRR) and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR), this study evaluated the impact of community health status on allogeneic HCT outcomes.Methods: This study included 18,544 adult allogeneic HCT recipients reported to the CIBMTR by 170 US centers in 2014-2016. Sociodemographic, environmental, and community indicators were derived from the CHRR, an aggregate community risk score was created, and scores were assigned to each patient (patient community risk score [PCS]) and transplant center (center community risk score [CCS]). Higher scores indicated less healthy communities. The impact of PCS and CCS on patient outcomes after allogeneic HCT was studied.Results: The median age was 55 years (range, 18-83 years). The median PCS was -0.21 (range, -1.37 to 2.10; standard deviation [SD], 0.42), and the median CCS was -0.13 (range, -1.04 to 0.96; SD, 0.40). In multivariable analyses, a higher PCS was associated with inferior survival (hazard ratio [HR] per 1 SD increase, 1.04; 99% CI, 1.00-1.08;P= .0089). Among hematologic malignancies, a tendency toward inferior survival was observed with a higher PCS (HR, 1.04; 99% CI, 1.00-1.08;P= .0102); a higher PCS was associated with higher nonrelapse mortality (NRM; HR, 1.08; 99% CI, 1.02-1.15;P= .0004). CCS was not significantly associated with survival, relapse, or NRM.Conclusions: Patients residing in counties with a worse community health status have inferior survival as a result of an increased risk of NRM after allogeneic HCT. There was no association between the community health status of the transplant center location and allogeneic HCT outcomes.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bejanyan, Nelli, et al.
(författare)
-
Myeloablative Conditioning for Allogeneic Transplantation Results in Superior Disease-Free Survival for Acute Myelogenous Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndromes with Low/Intermediate but not High Disease Risk Index : A Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research Study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. - : Elsevier. - 2666-6375 .- 2666-6367. ; 27:1, s. 68.e1-68.e9
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Compared with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC), myeloablative conditioning (MAC) is generally associated with lower relapse risk after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, disease-specific risk factors in AML/MDS can further inform when MAC and RIC may yield differential outcomes. We analyzed HCT outcomes stratified by the Disease Risk Index (DRI) in 4387 adults (age 40 to 65 years) to identify the impact of conditioning intensity. In the low/ intermediate-risk DRI cohort, RIC was associated with lower nonrelapse mortality (NRM) (hazard ratio [HR],.74; 95% confidence interval [CI],.62 to.88; P <.001) but significantly greater relapse risk (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.76; P <.001) and thus inferior disease-free survival (DFS) (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.33; P =.001). In the high/ very high-risk DRI cohort, RIC was associated with marginally lower NRM (HR,.83; 95% CI,.68 to 1.00; P =.051) and significantly higher relapse risk (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.41; P =.002), leading to similar DFS using either RIC or MAC. These data support MAC over RIC as the preferred conditioning intensity for patients with AML/MDS with low/intermediate-risk DRI, but with a similar benefit as RIC in high/very high-risk DRI. Novel MAC regimens with less toxicity could benefit all patients, but more potent antineoplastic approaches are needed for the high/ very-high risk DRI group.
|
|
