4.7 Article

High-resolution HLA matching in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a retrospective collaborative analysis

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 122, Issue 18, Pages 3220-3229

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2013-02-482547

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. German Jose Carreras Leukaemia Foundation [DJCLS 11/10]
  2. German Red Cross Blood Transfusion Service, Baden-Wuerttemberg/Hessen

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To validate current donor selection strategies based on previous international studies, we retrospectively analyzed 2646 transplantations performed for hematologic malignancies in 28 German transplant centers. Donors and recipients were high resolution typed for HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1, and -DQB1. The highest mortality in overall survival analysis was seen for HLA-A, -B, and DRB1 mismatches. HLA-DQB1 mismatched cases showed a trend toward higher mortality, mostly due to HLA-DQB1 antigen disparities. HLA incompatibilities at >1 locus showed additive detrimental effects. HLA mismatching had no significant effect on relapse incidence and primary graft failure. Graft source had no impact on survival end points, neither in univariate nor in multivariate analysis. Higher patient age, advanced disease, transplantations before 2004, patient C2C2 killer cell immunoglobulin-like receptor (KIR)-ligand phenotype, and unavailability of a national donor adversely influenced outcomes in multivariate analysis. Our study confirms the association of HLA-A, -B, -C, and -DRB1 incompatibilities with adverse outcome in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). The relevance of HLA-DQB1 disparities in single mismatched transplantations remains unclear. Similar hazard ratios for allele and antigen mismatches (possibly with an exception for HLA-DQB1) highlight the importance of allele level typing and matching in HSCT. The number of incompatibilities and their type significantly impact survival.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available