Search

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) represents an example of a highly complex and costly medical procedure with major applications in hematology and oncology. It is associated with life-threatening complications and, consequently, increased demands on healthcare resources. Although improving quality is an integral component of healthcare strategic planning, drivers of quality may be variable, and there is logical debate as to what drives quality in HSCT. Moreover, HSCT programs differ in structure and availability of resources, which drive the type of transplantations provided and determine what is affordable and/or economically feasible. The complexity of HSCT procedures with involvement of different stakeholders necessitates not only regulatory frameworks, but also robust quality systems to ensure consistent standards, demonstrate transparency for regulators, and define what quality means within the HSCT program. In an era of escalating healthcare complexity and heightened fiscal responsibility, transparency and accountability, accreditation contributes to ensuring that care meets the highest standards and can serve as a risk mitigation strategy. Quality management has become an indispensable tool for the management of a complex medical intervention such as HSCT. It allows the transplantation team to monitor its activities and identify areas for continuous improvement. The Worldwide Network for Blood and Marrow Transplantation invited a group of international experts in HSCT and quality management to work on providing a summary document about the key elements in quality and accreditation in HSCT and highlight the foremost challenges of implementing them, with a special focus on low- and middle-income economies.

The authors have requested that this preprint be removed from Research Square.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remains the only known treatment modality that can offer the possibility of cure for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Unfortunately, relapse and disease progression still occur in more than one third of cases even when patients are allografted in complete hematologic remission (CR). Treatment of AML relapsing after a first allo-HCT is particularly challenging. A second allo-HCT is offered to patients considered fit for the procedure, but reported outcomes have been conflicting. To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the totality of evidence on the role of a second allo-HCT in patients with AML, we performed a comprehensive literature search using PUBMED/MEDLINE and EMBASE on August 25, 2021, and extracted clinical outcome data relating to benefits (CR, overall survival [OS], and progression-free/disease-free survival [PFS/DFS]) and harms (acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease, non-relapse mortality [NRM], and relapse). The search identified 821 studies. Only 20 studies (n = 2772 patients) met our inclusion criteria. A second allo-HCT resulted in pooled CR, OS, PFS/DFS, NRM and relapse rates of 67%, 34%, 30%, 27%, and 51%, respectively. OS was 2-fold higher when the second allo-HCT was performed in CR (38% versus 17%) and 3-fold higher in patients who had a later relapse from the first allo-HCT (34% versus 10%). There was no apparent difference in pooled OS (hazard ratio = 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.31; P = .94) whether the same original donor or a different one was used. Notwithstanding several limitations apart from the high heterogeneity among included studies, this analysis shows that a second allo-HCT is a reasonable treatment option for relapsed AML. The procedure appears to be more effective when performed in CR and in patients who had a later relapse from the first allo-HCT. The high pooled relapse rates exceeding 50%, even when receiving the second allo-HCT in CR is worrisome and emphasizes the need to incorporate new therapies whether as post-transplantation maintenance or consolidation to mitigate relapse risk. This analysis was limited to patients receiving a second allo-HCT for the sole purpose of treating AML relapse. Accordingly, we caution against extrapolating these findings to other indications such as treatment of graft failure, poor graft function, or mixed donor chimerism.

Unmanipulated haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) with post-transplantation cyclophosphamide as graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis (haplo-PTCY) and unrelated double-unit umbilical cord blood transplantation (dUCBT) are feasible options for treating patients with high-risk acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). This study compared outcomes after dUCBT and haplo-HCT using peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) in adult patients with AML in complete remission (CR) who underwent transplantation in European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT)-affiliated centers. In a population of adults with de novo AML in first or second CR, we compared outcomes after dUCBT (n = 165) and after haplo-PTCY PBSC (n = 544) performed between January 2013 and December 2018. Patients receiving in vivo antithymocyte globulin, Campath, or ex vivo T cell depletion were excluded. The median follow-up was 33 months for the haplo-PTCY arm and 52 months for the dUCBT arm. No statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 arms in the rates of grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; P =. 18), grade III-IV acute GVHD (HR, 1.17; P =. 56), chronic GVHD (HR,. 86; P =. 48), relapse (HR, 1.07; P =. 77), nonrelapse mortality (NRM) (HR,. 94; P =. 77), leukemia-free survival (LFS) (HR,. 99; P =. 95), or overall survival (OS) (HR,. 99; P =. 97). Favorable cytogenetic risk was the sole factor predictive of lower relapse incidence (RI). Younger age at transplantation was associated with lower NRM and higher LFS and OS. Both dUCBT and haplo-PTCY with PBSCs can be considered valid approaches for adult AML patients in CR. New strategies should be investigated in both settings to define the most appropriate conditioning regimen and potentially decrease RI and NRM through better immune reconstitution and optimal supportive care.

Thrombosis is a recognized complication in sickle cell disease (SCD). Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remains the sole curative option for patients with severe SCD phenotypes. Data describing the effects of allo-HCT on recurrent thrombotic events (venous and arterial events) are limited, however. We evaluated 31 patients with SCD who underwent allo-HCT with a median follow-up of 34.5 months (range, 13 to 115) post-transplantation. No patient continued anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy after allo-HCT. There was an absolute difference of 32% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.3% to 32.2%; P = .002) in the prevalence of venous thromboembolic (VTE) events before and after allo-HSCT. In addition, there was an absolute difference of 38.5% (95% CI, 10.63 to 45.96; P = .006) in the number of ischemic cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) occurring before and after allo-HSCT. Patients with severe SCD who undergo allo-HCT are less likely to develop recurrent thrombotic events compared with a control cohort of patients matched for age and genotype (odds ratio, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.058 to 0.83; P = .025). Following curative therapy with allo-HCT, there is a reduction in recurrent arterial and venous thrombosis in patients with severe SCD phenotypes.

T cell prolymphocytic leukemia (T-PLL) is a rare, aggressive malignancy with limited treatment options and poor long-term survival. Previous studies of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) for T-PLL are limited by small numbers, and descriptions of patient and transplantation characteristics and outcomes after alloHCT are sparse. In this study, we evaluated outcomes of alloHCT in patients with T-PLL and attempted to identify predictors of post-transplantation relapse and survival. We conducted an analysis of data using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database on 266 patients with T-PLL who underwent alloHCT between 2008 and 2018. The 4-year rates of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), relapse, and treatment-related mortality (TRM) were 30.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.8% to 36.5%), 25.7% (95% CI, 20% to 32%), 41.9% (95% CI, 35.5% to 48.4%), and 32.4% (95% CI, 26.4% to 38.6%), respectively. In multivariable analyses, 3 variables were associated with inferior OS: receipt of a myeloablative conditioning (MAC) regimen (hazard ratio [HR], 2.18; P < .0001), age >60 years (HR, 1.61; P = .0053), and suboptimal performance status, defined by Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) 90 or chemosensitive disease.