Optimizing selection of double cord blood units for transplantation of adult patients with malignant diseases

13Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

Double-unit unrelated cord blood transplantation (DUCBT) is an option in patients for whom a single unit is not sufficient to provide an adequate number of cells. As current guidelines on UCB unit selection are mainly based on single-unit UCB data, we performed a retrospective analysis of 1375 adult recipients of DUCBT for hematologic malignancies to determine optimal criteria for graft selection. Cryopreserved total nucleated cells (TNCs; ≤3.5 vs >3.5 × 107/kg: hazard ratio [HR], 1.53; 30% vs 45%; P =.01), number of HLA mismatches (≥2 vs 0-1: HR, 1.28; 42% vs 48%; = 5 .01), and ABO compatibility (minor/major ABO incompatibility vs compatibility: HR, 1.28; = 5 .04) were independent risk factors for OS. Cryopreserved CD34+ cell dose ≥0.7 × 105/kg in the winning UCB was associated with improved OS (HR, 1.34; = 5 .03). Low TNC (≤3.5 × 107/kg) and CD34+ (≤1.4 × 105/kg) cell doses were related to decreased neutrophil recovery (HR, 0.65 [P = .01] and HR, 0.81 [P = .01], respectively). DUCBT recipients with ≥2 HLA mismatches had a higher incidence of grade II-IV and III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease (HR, 1.26 [P = .03] and 1.59 [P = .02], respectively). Low TNC dose (HR, 1.57; P = .02) and receiving UCB with ≥2 HLA mismatches (HR, 1.35; P=.03) were associatedwith increased transplant-related mortality. Our data support selecting adequately HLA-matched UCB units with a double-unit cryopreserved TNC dose .3.5 × 107/kg and CD34+ cell dose of ≥0.7 × 105/kg per unit in DUCBT candidates.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fatobene, G., Volt, F., Moreira, F., Mariano, L., Chevallier, P., Furst, S., … Rocha, V. (2020). Optimizing selection of double cord blood units for transplantation of adult patients with malignant diseases. Blood Advances, 4(24), 6327–6335. https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2020002258

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free