4 research outputs found
Transplant Physicians’ Attitudes on Candidacy for Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (HCT) in Older Patients: The Need for a Standardized Geriatric Assessment (GA) Tool
Background
Despite improvements in conditioning regimens and supportive care having expanded the curative potential of HCT, underutilization of HCT in older adults persists (Bhatt VR et al, BMT 2017). Therefore, we conducted a survey of transplant physicians (TP) to determine their perceptions of the impact of older age (≥60 years) on HCT candidacy and utilization of tools to gauge candidacy.
Methods
We conducted a 23-item, online cross-sectional survey of adult physicians recruited from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research between May and July 2019.
Results
175/770 (22.7%) TP completed the survey; majority of respondents were 41-60 years old, male, and practicing in a teaching hospital. Over 75% were at centers performing ≥50 HCT per year. When considering regimen intensity, most (96%, n=168) had an upper age limit (UAL) for using a myeloablative regimen (MAC), with only 29 physicians (17%) stating they would consider MAC for patients ≥70 years. In contrast, when considering a reduced intensity/non-myeloablative conditioning (RIC/NMA), 8%, (n=13), 54% (n=93), and 20% (n=35) stated that age 70, 75, and 80 years respectively would be the UAL to use this approach, with 18% (n=31) reporting no UAL. TP agreed that Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) could exclude older pts for HCT, with 39.1% (n=66), 42.6% (n=72), and 11.4% (n=20) requiring KPS of ≥70, 80, and 90, respectively. The majority (n=92, 52.5%) indicated an HCT-comorbidity index threshold for exclusion, mostly ranging from ≥3 to ≥ 5. Almost all (89.7%) endorsed the need for a better health assessment of pre-HCT vulnerabilities to guide candidacy for pts ≥60 with varied assessments being utilized beyond KPS (Figure 1). However, the majority of centers rarely (33.1%) or never (45.7%) utilize a dedicated geriatrician/geriatric-oncologist to assess alloHCT candidates ≥60 yrs. The largest barriers to performing GA included uncertainty about which tools to use, lack of knowledge and training, and lack of appropriate clinical support staff (Figure 2). Approximately half (n=78, 45%) endorsed GA now routinely influences candidacy.
Conclusions
The vast majority of TP will consider RIC/NMA alloHCT for patients ≥70 years. However, there is heterogeneity in assessing candidacy. Incorporation of GA into a standardized and easily applied health assessment tool for risk stratification is an unmet need. The recently opened BMT CTN 1704 may aid in addressing this gap
Ocular graft-versus-host disease after hematopoietic cell transplantation: Expert review from the Late Effects and Quality of Life Working Committee of the CIBMTR and Transplant Complications Working Party of the EBMT.
Ocular graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) occurs in more than half of patients who develop chronic GVHD after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), causing prolonged morbidity, which affects activities of daily living and quality of life. Here we provide an expert review of ocular GVHD in a collaboration between transplant physicians and ophthalmologists through the Late Effects and Quality of Life Working Committee of the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research and the Transplant Complications Working Party of the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Recent updates in ocular GVHD, regarding pathophysiology, preclinical models, risk factors, prevention, screening, diagnosis, response criteria, evaluation measures, and treatment are discussed in this review. Ocular GVHD has at least three biological processes: lacrimal gland dysfunction, meibomian gland dysfunction, and corneoconjunctival inflammation. Preclinical models have found several novel pathogenic mechanisms, including renin angiotensin system and endoplasmic reticulum stress signaling that can be targeted by therapeutic agents. Many studies have identified reliable tests for establishing diagnosis and response assessment of ocular GVHD. Efficacy of systemic and topical treatment for ocular GVHD is summarized. It is important for all health professionals taking care of HCT recipients to have adequate knowledge of ocular GVHD for optimal care
Recommended from our members
Non-GVHD ocular complications after hematopoietic cell transplantation: expert review from the Late Effects and Quality of Life Working Committee of the CIBMTR and Transplant Complications Working Party of the EBMT.
Non-graft-vs.-host disease (non-GVHD) ocular complications are generally uncommon after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), but can cause prolonged morbidity affecting activities of daily living and quality of life. Here we provide an expert review of non-GVHD ocular complications in a collaboration between transplant physicians and ophthalmologists through the Late Effects and Quality of Life Working Committee of the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research and the Transplant Complications Working Party of the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Complications discussed in this review include cataracts, glaucoma, ocular infections, ocular involvement with malignancy, ischemic microvascular retinopathy, central retinal vein occlusion, retinal hemorrhage, retinal detachment, and ocular toxicities associated with medications. We have summarized incidence, risk factors, screening, prevention and treatment of individual complicastions and generated evidence-based recommendations. Baseline ocular evaluation before HCT should be considered in all patients who undergo HCT. Follow-up evaluations should be considered according to clinical symptoms, signs and risk factors. Better preventive strategies and treatments remain to be investigated for individual ocular complications after HCT. Both transplant physicians and ophthalmologists should be knowledgeable of non-GVHD ocular complications and provide comprehensive collaborative team care