In 2022, which is preferred: haploidentical or cord transplant?

IF 2.9 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program Pub Date : 2022-12-09 DOI:10.1182/hematology.2022000327
Arnon Nagler, Mohamad Mohty
{"title":"In 2022, which is preferred: haploidentical or cord transplant?","authors":"Arnon Nagler,&nbsp;Mohamad Mohty","doi":"10.1182/hematology.2022000327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is the treatment of choice for high-risk hematological malignancies such as acute myeloid and lymphocytic leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome, and myeloproliferative disorders. Alternative donor transplantation from either haploidentical (haplo-SCT) or cord blood donor (CBT) is an established therapeutic alternative for patients who need transplants but lack a human leukocyte antigen-matched donor. Although haplo-SCT (mainly non-T-cell-depleted haplo-SCT with posttransplant cyclophosphamide) is increasing while CBT is decreasing worldwide (Figure 1), recent developments in CBT, especially cord blood expansion and other strategies to improve engraftment and immune reconstitution post-CBT, make CBT still a valuable option. This article discusses the 2 options based on the currently available data, focusing on adults, and tries to give some clues to help the transplant physician choose a haploidentical vs a cord blood donor. Given the limited numbers of published or ongoing well-designed randomized controlled trials comparing haplo-SCT to CBT and the overall similar clinical results in the available, mostly registry-based, and single-center studies, with substantial heterogeneity and variability, the decision to perform haplo-SCT or CBT in a given patient depends not only on the patient, disease, and donor characteristics and donor availability (although most if not all patients should have in principle an alternative donor) but also on the transplant physician's discretion and, most importantly, the center's experience and preference and ongoing protocols and strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12973,"journal":{"name":"Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program","volume":"2022 1","pages":"64-73"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9820258/pdf/hem.2022000327.pdf","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1182/hematology.2022000327","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is the treatment of choice for high-risk hematological malignancies such as acute myeloid and lymphocytic leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome, and myeloproliferative disorders. Alternative donor transplantation from either haploidentical (haplo-SCT) or cord blood donor (CBT) is an established therapeutic alternative for patients who need transplants but lack a human leukocyte antigen-matched donor. Although haplo-SCT (mainly non-T-cell-depleted haplo-SCT with posttransplant cyclophosphamide) is increasing while CBT is decreasing worldwide (Figure 1), recent developments in CBT, especially cord blood expansion and other strategies to improve engraftment and immune reconstitution post-CBT, make CBT still a valuable option. This article discusses the 2 options based on the currently available data, focusing on adults, and tries to give some clues to help the transplant physician choose a haploidentical vs a cord blood donor. Given the limited numbers of published or ongoing well-designed randomized controlled trials comparing haplo-SCT to CBT and the overall similar clinical results in the available, mostly registry-based, and single-center studies, with substantial heterogeneity and variability, the decision to perform haplo-SCT or CBT in a given patient depends not only on the patient, disease, and donor characteristics and donor availability (although most if not all patients should have in principle an alternative donor) but also on the transplant physician's discretion and, most importantly, the center's experience and preference and ongoing protocols and strategies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
2022年,单倍体同卵还是脐带移植?
同种异体造血干细胞移植是治疗高危血液系统恶性肿瘤的首选方法,如急性髓系和淋巴细胞白血病、骨髓增生异常综合征和骨髓增生性疾病。对于需要移植但缺乏人类白细胞抗原匹配供体的患者,单倍体- sct或脐带血供体替代供体移植是一种成熟的治疗选择。尽管单倍体sct(主要是非t细胞耗尽的单倍体sct移植后环磷酰胺)正在增加,而CBT在全球范围内正在减少(图1),但CBT的最新发展,特别是脐带血扩增和其他改善CBT后植入和免疫重建的策略,使CBT仍然是一个有价值的选择。本文基于现有的数据讨论了这两种选择,主要针对成年人,并试图提供一些线索来帮助移植医生选择单倍体与脐带血供体。考虑到比较单倍体sct与CBT的已发表或正在进行的精心设计的随机对照试验数量有限,以及现有的总体相似的临床结果,主要是基于登记的单中心研究,具有很大的异质性和可变性,对特定患者进行单倍体sct或CBT的决定不仅取决于患者,疾病,供体的特征和供体的可用性(尽管大多数病人原则上应该有一个替代供体),但也取决于移植医生的判断,最重要的是,取决于中心的经验和偏好,以及正在进行的协议和策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program
Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-HEMATOLOGY
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Hematology, the ASH Education Program, is published annually by the American Society of Hematology (ASH) in one volume per year.
期刊最新文献
Atypical CML: diagnosis and treatment. Langerhans cell histiocytosis: promises and caveats of targeted therapies in high-risk and CNS disease. Multiple myeloma: a paradigm for blending community and academic care. The sum of the parts: what we can and cannot learn from comorbidity scores in allogeneic transplantation. Thrombopoietin receptor agonists for chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia: a new solution for an old problem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1