4.2 Review

Haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplant: How to choose the best donor? Guidelines from the Francophone Society of Bone Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (SFGM-TC)

期刊

BULLETIN DU CANCER
卷 107, 期 1, 页码 S72-S84

出版社

ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF
DOI: 10.1016/j.bulcan.2019.07.011

关键词

Haploidentical; transplantation; Donor choice; DSA

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Haploidentical hemotopoietic stem cell transplantation hos been growing steadily since 2012. The SFGM-TC has twice published guidelines concerning T-cell repleted haploidentical grafts with high dose cyclophosphomide post-transplantation. The 2013 workshop recommended using the non-myeloablative Baltimore protocol with bone morrow and developed prospective protocols to evaluate these transplantations. The 2015 workshop reported improved results of reduced conditioning regimens in Hodgkin's lymphoma and intensive conditioning in myeloid hemopathies, and a similar outcome with 10/10 HIA matched donor with the same disease-risk score thus raising the question of the qualifier alternative for haploidentical transplants. The current work concerns the criteria for selecting the donor. The main criterion remains the absence of anti-HLA antibodies directed against the donor present in the recipient sera (DSA - Donor Specific Antibodies). In case of DSA and in the absence of on alternative donor, desensitization protocols exist. The other criteria ore impossible to prioritize: age, sex, CMV, and blood type. The degree of relatedness and the number of MA incompatibilities do not seem to be a criterion of choice. The 'ideal' donor would be a young mon, CMV-matched, without major ABO incompatibility with a marrow transplant. There is insufficient data for the KIR-ligand and NIMA/NIPA mismatch. Peripheral stem cell grofts appear to yield more acute GVHD thon bone marrow grofts after intensive conditioning, but with comparable survival rates. Based on the literature review, the comparison of haploidentical with unrelated donors encourages inclusion in existing national protocols randomizing these different donors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据