ABO Mismatching and Haploidentical Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Acute Myeloid Leukemia—a Report from the ALWP of the EBMT

Bipin N. Savani,Myriam Labopin,Jonathan Canaani,Xiao-Jun Huang,William Arcese,Johanna Tischer,Yener Koc,Benedetto Bruno,Zafer Gulbas,Didier Blaise,Johan A. Maertens,Gerhard Ehninger,Frederic Baron,Norbert Gorin,Jordi Esteve,Christoph Schmid,Sebastian Giebel,Fabio Ciceri,Mohamad Mohty,Arnon Nagler
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2017.01.015
2017-01-01
Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation
Abstract:Background: About 30-50% of HLA-matched hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) are performed with ABOmismatch (ABO-MM) donor, which can be classified as either major, minor or bidirectional. The impact of ABO-MM on clinical outcome after HCT remains controversial and no large series is available to study the impact of ABO-MM in patients (pts) receiving haploidentical-HCT (haplo-HCT). Methods: 837 pts with AML that underwent haplo-HCT from January 2005 to December 2014 were analyzed to study the long term impact of ABO-mismatching in haplo-HCT. The comparative analysis was performed between pts receiving ABO-matched vs. ABO-MM for common outcome variables. Results: 522 (62%) pts received ABO-matched whereas 315 (38%) underwentABO-MMhaplo-HCT including 150 (18%) minor ABOMM (minor-A, 75 [50%]), 127 (15%) major ABO-MM (major-O, 98 [77%]) and 38 (5%) bidirectional ABO-MM (Bidirectional-A, 20 [53%]). Median agewas 42 years (range, 18-77) andwas not significantly different between ABO groups (P = .67). The median follow-up period was 36 months (IQR, 23-53). Median year of transplantationwas 2011. More than half of ptswere in CR1 and nearly one third of pts were with active disease prior to transplantation. 497 (59%) pts received ablative and 340 (41%) reduced intensity or non-ablative conditioning regimen. 219 (26%) of pts received BM, 240 (29%)BM+PB, 378 (45%) PB alone and 123 (15%) ex-vivo T-cell depleted grafts. There were no significant differences in distributions of pts and transplant characteristics among ABO- groups. 771 (94%) pts engrafted and the percentage of engraftmentwas lower in the major mismatch group (88% vs 95% in other group, P = .007). The cumulative incidences (CI) of day 100 grade II-IV acute GVHDwas 31% (III-IV, 10%) and the 3-year CI of chronic GVHD was 31% (95% CI, 27-34), and were not significantly different between the ABO-groups (P = .124 and .392). There was no differences in OS, RI, and NRM between ABOgroups. Bidirectional ABO-group had improved 3-year LFS (67%) and GFRS (54%) compared to other ABO-group in univariate analysis. Therewas no impact of ABO-MM when T-cells replete and T-depleted groups analyzed separately. In multivariate analysis, our data showed no significant differences in OS, LFS, RI, NRM, and chronic GVHD between ABO-groups. The analyses were performed separately for pts receiving PB and BM+/-PB grafts. There was no statistical difference between ABO-groups for OS, LFS, RI, NRM, GFRS and chronic GVHD in pts receiving PB grafts. However, among BM group, pts with minor ABO-MM recipients had significantly higher acute GVHD (HR 2; 95% CI, 1-4; P = .048) without impacting other transplant outcome. Conclusion: Despite the limitation of a retrospective registry based study, our large series shows no significant long term outcome difference between ABO matched and mismatched groups after haplo-HCT in current era.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?