4.8 Article

Case report: HLA-haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplant with posttransplant cyclophosphamide in a patient with leukocyte adhesion deficiency type I

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1020362

关键词

leukocyte adhesion deficiency; posttransplant cyclophosphamide; hematopoietic cell transplantation; graft-versus-host disease; inborn errors of immunity

资金

  1. MEXT/JSPS KAKENHI
  2. [22K07887]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Leukocyte adhesion deficiency type I (LAD-I) is a rare genetic immune disorder that can be cured with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT). In cases where ideal donors are unavailable, HLA-haploidentical HCT with posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PT-CY) can be a safe and effective alternative.
Leukocyte adhesion deficiency type I (LAD-I) is a rare autosomal recessive inborn error of immunity (IEI) caused by the defects in CD18, encoded by the ITGB2 gene. LAD-I is characterized by defective leukocyte adhesion to the vascular endothelium and impaired migration of leukocytes. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) is the only curative treatment for LAD-I. In an absence of ideal donor for HCT, human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-haploidentical HCT is performed. Posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PT-CY) is a relatively new graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylactic measure and has been increasingly used in HLA-haploidentical HCT for malignant and nonmalignant diseases. However, experience in using PT-CY for rare IEIs, such as LAD-I, is very limited. We report a case of LAD-I successfully treated with HLA-haploidentical HCT with PT-CY. Complete chimerism was achieved, and the patient was cured. Her transplant course was complicated by mild GVHD, cytomegalovirus reactivation and veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome, which were successfully treated. HLA-haploidentical HCT with PT-CY is a safe and effective option for patients with LAD-I when HLA-matched donors are unavailable.

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

4.8
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