Clinical impact of cryopreservation of allogeneic hematopoietic cell grafts during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Steven M Devine, Stephanie Bo-Subait, Michelle Kuxhausen, Stephen R Spellman, Caitrin Bupp, Kwang Woo Ahn, Heather E Stefanski, Jeffery J Auletta, Brent R Logan, Bronwen E Shaw
Author Information
  1. Steven M Devine: Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, National Marrow Donor Program/Be The Match, Minneapolis, MN. ORCID
  2. Stephanie Bo-Subait: Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, National Marrow Donor Program/Be The Match, Minneapolis, MN.
  3. Michelle Kuxhausen: Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, National Marrow Donor Program/Be The Match, Minneapolis, MN.
  4. Stephen R Spellman: Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, National Marrow Donor Program/Be The Match, Minneapolis, MN.
  5. Caitrin Bupp: Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, National Marrow Donor Program/Be The Match, Minneapolis, MN.
  6. Kwang Woo Ahn: Department of Medicine, Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI. ORCID
  7. Heather E Stefanski: Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, National Marrow Donor Program/Be The Match, Minneapolis, MN.
  8. Jeffery J Auletta: Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, National Marrow Donor Program/Be The Match, Minneapolis, MN.
  9. Brent R Logan: Department of Medicine, Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI.
  10. Bronwen E Shaw: Department of Medicine, Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI.

Abstract

At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Marrow Donor Program mandated the cryopreservation of hematopoietic cell grafts from volunteer unrelated donors because of numerous patient and donor safety concerns and logistical hurdles. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research outcomes database, we report the impact of cryopreservation on overall survival (OS) and other outcomes within 1 year after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). We analyzed 1543 recipients of cryopreserved allografts receiving HCT at US centers during the first 6 months of the pandemic and compared them with 2499 recipients of fresh allografts during a 6-month period in 2019. On multivariable regression analysis, we observed no difference in the OS (P = .09), nonrelapse mortality (P = .89), graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), or GVHD- and relapse-free survival (P = .58) in recipients of cryopreserved vs fresh allografts. Disease-free survival (DFS) was lower in the cryopreserved allograft recipients (P = .006) because of a higher risk of relapse (P = .01) compared with the fresh allograft recipients. Primary graft failure was higher (P = .01), and the risk of chronic GVHD was lower (P = .001) with cryopreservation compared with fresh grafts. In conclusion, although there was no negative impact of cryopreservation on OS, relapse was higher, and DFS was lower than that with no cryopreservation. Fresh grafts are recommended as the pandemic-related logistical hurdles resolve. Cryopreservation should be considered an option for patients when fresh grafts are not feasible.

References

  1. Transplant Cell Ther. 2021 Dec;27(12):1022.e1-1022.e6 [PMID: 34571211]
  2. Am J Hematol. 2021 Feb 1;96(2):169-171 [PMID: 33206414]
  3. Blood Adv. 2021 Dec 14;5(23):5140-5149 [PMID: 34581754]
  4. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2007 Oct;13(10):1233-43 [PMID: 17889361]
  5. Front Immunol. 2022 Sep 20;13:937900 [PMID: 36203566]
  6. Transplant Cell Ther. 2021 Feb;27(2):133-141 [PMID: 33830022]
  7. Transfus Apher Sci. 2020 Feb;59(1):102594 [PMID: 31303510]
  8. Br J Haematol. 2021 Feb;192(3):467-473 [PMID: 33474730]
  9. J Transl Med. 2021 Apr 8;19(1):145 [PMID: 33832504]
  10. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020 Nov;26(11):1983-1994 [PMID: 32736007]
  11. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020 Jun;26(6):1210-1217 [PMID: 32088366]
  12. Lancet. 2007 Oct 20;370(9596):1453-7 [PMID: 18064739]
  13. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020 Jul;26(7):1312-1317 [PMID: 32283185]
  14. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020 Jul;26(7):e161-e166 [PMID: 32389803]
  15. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1995 Jun;15(6):825-8 [PMID: 7581076]
  16. Transplant Cell Ther. 2022 Apr;28(4):215.e1-215.e10 [PMID: 35042013]
  17. Am J Hematol. 2021 Mar 1;96(3):E91-E92 [PMID: 33368593]
  18. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009 Dec;15(12):1628-33 [PMID: 19896087]
  19. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2008 Jul;42(2):121-8 [PMID: 18391988]
  20. Blood Adv. 2023 Jun 13;7(11):2431-2435 [PMID: 36595453]
  21. Am J Hematol. 2021 Feb 1;96(2):179-187 [PMID: 33108034]
  22. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020 Nov;26(11):e298-e299 [PMID: 32822844]
  23. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2021 Aug;56(8):2013-2015 [PMID: 33846562]
  24. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2006 Sep;38(6):399-405 [PMID: 16892075]
  25. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2020 Jul;26(7):e145-e146 [PMID: 32305358]
  26. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013 Feb;48(2):243-8 [PMID: 22732701]

Grants

  1. U24 CA076518/NCI NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Humans
COVID-19
Pandemics
Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Graft vs Host Disease
Unrelated Donors
Cryopreservation
Recurrence

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0cryopreservationP =graftsrecipientsfreshpandemichematopoieticcellimpactsurvivalcryopreservedallograftscomparedlowerhigheronsetCOVID-19MarrowlogisticalhurdlesoutcomesOSHCTGVHDDFSallograftriskrelapse01NationalDonorProgrammandatedvolunteerunrelateddonorsnumerouspatientdonorsafetyconcernsUsingCenterInternationalBloodTransplantResearchdatabasereportoverallwithin1yeartransplantationanalyzed1543receivingUScentersfirst6months24996-monthperiod2019multivariableregressionanalysisobserveddifferenceOS 09nonrelapsemortality89graft-versus-hostdiseaseGVHD-relapse-free58vsDisease-free006PrimarygraftfailureP = chronic001conclusionalthoughnegativeFreshrecommendedpandemic-relatedresolveCryopreservationconsideredoptionpatientsfeasibleClinicalallogeneic

Similar Articles

Cited By