Busulfan/Fludarabine- or Treosulfan/Fludarabine-Based Conditioning Regimen for Patients with Wiskott-Aldrich Syndrome – an EBMT Inborn Errors Working Party and Scetide Study

Introduction Excellent survival rates have been reported after allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome (WAS) patients. Recipient age >5 years in MUD HSCT as well as MMFD as donor were negative predictors for outcome. However, the vast majority of HSCTs in previously published studies were performed with (oral) busulfan/cyclophosphamide-based conditioning and in the early 2000 years or before. Objectives To compare OS and EFS after HSCT with either busulfan/fludarabine (BuFlu) ± thiotepa (TT) or treosulfan/fludarabine (TreoFlu) ± TT as recommended for primary immunodeficiencies since 2005 by the inborn errors working party (IEWP) of EBMT and ESID. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis via the EBMT and SCETIDE registries of WAS patients transplanted between 20006 and 2016 with these two regimens. At the time of this interim analysis, 174 patients were included, 92 (53%) with BuFlu±TT and 82 (47%) with TreoFlu±TT conditioning, with a median age of 1.6 years (0.2-30) at HSCT and a median follow-up of 32.9 months (1.5-128.9). Donors were MSD in 30, other MRD in 5, MUD (9/10 or 10/10) in 105, MMUD ( Results Two year overall survival (OS) of the entire cohort was 88.6% (95% c.i. 83.5%-93.6%). There was no significant difference in OS between BuFlu±TT or TreoFlu±TT conditioning (2-year OS 88.1% vs. 89.5%; p=0.7). Patients aged >5 years had a worse OS as compared to those 5 years or younger at HSCT (74.9% vs. 90.8%; p=0.005). The type of donor had no influence on OS: 96.4% for MSD/MFD, 86.8% for MUD/MMUD and 87.7% for MMFD (p=0.4). The rate of complete (≥90%) donor chimerism at last follow-up or before a secondary procedure (if a patient had one) was 41/42 (98%) in the BuFlu±TT group and 21/35 (60%) in the TreoFlu±TT group (p=0.0001). Twenty-six patients required a second procedure: stem cell boost in 4, donor lymphocyte infusion in 9, 2nd HSCT in 15 and splenectomy in 1. The 2-year cumulative incidence (CI) of second procedures was higher at 33.9% in the TreoFlu±TT versus 12.8% in the BuFlu±TT group (p=0.017), and 2-year EFS (events: second procedure or death) was 61.4% in the TreoFlu±TT and 75.0% in the BuFlu±TT group (p=0.2). Grade II-IV acute GVHD had the same incidence in both groups (24.4% vs. 26.3%; p=0.849) and chronic GVHD of any grade was borderline more frequent in the TreoFlu±TT group (17.2% vs 6.7%; p=0.054). Conclusion HSCT with either BuFlu±TT or TreoFlu±TT conditioning reliably cures almost 90% of patients with WAS regardless of donor type. Age >5 years at HSCT remains a negative risk factor. More patients were mixed chimeras and required second procedures after TreoFlu±TT than after BuFlu±TT conditioning. These data confirm the feasibility and efficacy of the regimens currently recommended by the IEWP

Hematopoietic cell transplantation in severe combined immunodeficiency : The SCETIDE 2006-2014 European cohort

Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The AuthorsBackground: Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) represents a curative treatment for patients with severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), a group of monogenic immune disorders with an otherwise fatal outcome. Objective: We performed a comprehensive multicenter analysis of genotype-specific HSCT outcome, including detailed analysis of immune reconstitution (IR) and the predictive value for clinical outcome. Methods: HSCT outcome was studied in 338 patients with genetically confirmed SCID who underwent transplantation in 2006-2014 and who were registered in the SCETIDE registry. In a representative subgroup of 152 patients, data on IR and long-term clinical outcome were analyzed. Results: Two-year OS was similar with matched family and unrelated donors and better than mismatched donor HSCT (P 0.5 × 10e3/μL at +1 year were identified as independent predictors of favorable clinical and immunologic outcome. Conclusion: Recent advances in HSCT in SCID patients have resulted in improved OS and EFS in all genotypes and donor types. To achieve a favorable long-term outcome, treatment strategies should aim for optimal naive CD4 T lymphocyte regeneration.Peer reviewe

Controlo químico de infestantes

Uma planta é considerada infestante quando nasce espontaneamente num local e momento indesejados, podendo interferir negativamente com a cultura instalada. As infestantes competem com as culturas para o espaço, a luz, água e nutrientes, podendo atrasar e prejudicar as operações de colheita, depreciar o produto final e assegurarem a reinfestação nas culturas seguintes. Dado o modo de propagação diferenciado das diversas espécies de infestantes, com as anuais a propagarem-se por semente e as perenes ou vivazes a assegurarem a sua propagação através de órgãos vegetativos (rizomas, bolbos, tubérculos, etc.), assim, também o seu controlo quer químico, quer mecânico terá que ser diferenciado, ou seja, para controlar infestantes anuais será suficiente destruir a sua parte aérea, enquanto para controlar infestantes perenes teremos que destruir os seus órgãos reprodutivos. O controlo de infestantes poderá ser químico, através da utilização de herbicidas, ou mecânico pela utilização de alfaias agrícolas, tais como a charrua de aivecas, a charrua de discos, a grade de discos, o escarificador e a fresa. Quando a técnica utilizada na instalação das culturas é a sementeira directa, o controlo das infestantes terá que ser obrigatoriamente químico, enquanto se o recurso à mobilização do solo for a técnica mais utilizada (sistema de mobilização tradicional ou sistema de mobilização reduzida), o controlo das infestantes tanto poderá ser químico como mecânico. Neste trabalho iremos abordar apenas, o controlo químico de infestantes

Hematopoietic cell transplantation in severe combined immunodeficiency: The SCETIDE 2006-2014 European cohort

BACKGROUND: Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) represents a curative treatment for patients with severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), a group of monogenic immune disorders with an otherwise fatal outcome. OBJECTIVE: We performed a comprehensive multicenter analysis of genotype-specific HSCT outcome, including detailed analysis of immune reconstitution (IR) and the predictive value for clinical outcome. METHODS: HSCT outcome was studied in 338 patients with genetically confirmed SCID who underwent transplantation in 2006-2014 and who were registered in the SCETIDE registry. In a representative subgroup of 152 patients, data on IR and long-term clinical outcome were analyzed. RESULTS: Two-year OS was similar with matched family and unrelated donors and better than mismatched donor HSCT (P 0.5 × 10$^{e3}$/μL at +1 year were identified as independent predictors of favorable clinical and immunologic outcome. CONCLUSION: Recent advances in HSCT in SCID patients have resulted in improved OS and EFS in all genotypes and donor types. To achieve a favorable long-term outcome, treatment strategies should aim for optimal naive CD4 T lymphocyte regeneration

Survival in primary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, 2016 to 2021: etoposide is better than its reputation

Böhm S, Wustrau K, Pachlopnik Schmid J, et al. Survival in primary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, 2016 to 2021: etoposide is better than its reputation. Blood. 2024;143(10):872-881.ABSTRACT: Primary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (pHLH) is a life-threatening hyperinflammatory syndrome that develops mainly in patients with genetic disorders of lymphocyte cytotoxicity and X-linked lymphoproliferative syndromes. Previous studies with etoposide-based treatment followed by hematopoetic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) resulted in 5-year survival of 50% to 59%. Contemporary data are lacking. We evaluated 88 patients with pHLH documented in the international HLH registry from 2016-2021. In 12 of 88 patients, diagnosis was made without HLH activity, based on siblings or albinism. Major HLH-directed drugs (etoposide, antithymocyte globulin, alemtuzumab, emapalumab, ruxolitinib) were administered to 66 of 76 patients who were symptomatic (86% first-line etoposide); 16 of 57 patients treated with etoposide and 3 of 9 with other first-line treatment received salvage therapy. HSCT was performed in 75 patients; 7 patients died before HSCT. Three-year probability of survival (pSU) was 82% (confidence interval [CI], 72%-88%) for the entire cohort and 77% (CI, 64%-86%) for patients receiving first-line etoposide. Compared with the HLH-2004 study, both pre-HSCT and post-HSCT survival of patients receiving first-line etoposide improved, 83% to 91% and 70% to 88%. Differences to HLH-2004 included preferential use of reduced-toxicity conditioning and reduced time from diagnosis to HSCT (from 148 to 88 days). Three-year pSU was lower with haploidentical (4 of 9 patients [44%]) than with other donors (62 of 66 [94%]; P< .001). Importantly, early HSCT for patients who were asymptomatic resulted in 100% survival, emphasizing the potential benefit of newborn screening. This contemporary standard-of-care study of patients with pHLH reveals that first-line etoposide-based therapy is better than previously reported, providing a benchmark for novel treatment regimes. © 2024 American Society of Hematology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies

BCG vaccination in patients with severe combined immunodeficiency: Complications, risks, and vaccination policies

BACKGROUND: Severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) is a syndrome characterized by profound T-cell deficiency. BCG vaccine is contraindicated in patients with SCID. Because most countries encourage BCG vaccination at birth, a high percentage of patients with SCID are vaccinated before their immune defect is detected. OBJECTIVES: We sought to describe the complications and risks associated with BCG vaccination in patients with SCID. METHODS: An extensive standardized questionnaire evaluating complications, therapeutics, and outcomes regarding BCG vaccination in patients given a diagnosis of SCID was widely distributed. Summary statistics and association analysis was performed. RESULTS: Data on 349 BCG-vaccinated patients with SCID from 28 centers in 17 countries were analyzed. Fifty-one percent of the patients had BCG-associated complications, 34% disseminated and 17% localized (a 33,000- and 400-fold increase, respectively, over the general population). Patients receiving early vaccination (≤1 month) showed an increased prevalence of complications (P = .006) and death caused by BCG-associated complications (P < .0001). The odds of experiencing complications among patients with T-cell numbers of 250/μL or less at diagnosis was 2.1 times higher (95% CI, 1.4-3.4 times higher; P = .001) than among those with T-cell numbers of greater than 250/μL. BCG-associated complications were reported in 2 of 78 patients who received antimycobacterial therapy while asymptomatic, and no deaths caused by BCG-associated complications occurred in this group. In contrast, 46 BCG-associated deaths were reported among 160 patients treated with antimycobacterial therapy for a symptomatic BCG infection (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: BCG vaccine has a very high rate of complications in patients with SCID, which increase morbidity and mortality rates. Until safer and more efficient antituberculosis vaccines become available, delay in BCG vaccination should be considered to protect highly vulnerable populations from preventable complications.Fil: Gómez Raccio, Andrea C.. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños ; ArgentinaFil: Orellana, Julio Cesar. Provincia de Córdoba. Hospital de Niños de la Santísima Trinidad. División de Alergia e Inmunología Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Liberatore, Diana. Hospital Italiano; ArgentinaFil: Bezrodnik, Liliana. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños ; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Marciano, Beatriz E.. National Institutes of Health; Estados UnidosFil: Huang, Chiung Yu. National Institutes of Health; Estados UnidosFil: Joshi, Gyan. National Institutes of Health; Estados UnidosFil: Rezaei, Nima. Teheran University of Medical Sciences. Children's Medical Center Hospital. Pediatric Center of Excellence; IránFil: Costa Carvalho, Beatriz. Federal University of São Paulo; BrasilFil: Cunha, Luciana. Federal University of Minas Gerais; BrasilFil: Pinto, Jorge A.. Federal University of Minas Gerais; BrasilFil: Espinosa Padilla, Sara E.. Secretaría de Salud. Instituto Nacional de Pediatría; MéxicoFil: Hernandez Nieto, Leticia. Secretaría de Salud. Instituto Nacional de Pediatría; MéxicoFil: Elfeky, Reem A.. Ain Shams University; EgiptoFil: Ariga, Tadashi. Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine; JapónFil: Toshio, Heike. Kyoto University Hospital; JapónFil: Dogu, Figen. Ankara University Medical School; TurquíaFil: Cipe, Funda. Ankara University Medical School; TurquíaFil: Formankova, Renata. Charles University; República Checa. University Hospital Motol; República ChecaFil: Nuñez Nuñez, M. Enriqueta. Western National Medical Center; MéxicoFil: Gonçalo Marques, Jose. Santa María Hospital. Lisbon Academic Center; PortugalFil: Pereira, María I.. Provincia de Córdoba. Hospital de Niños de la Santísima Trinidad. División de Alergia e Inmunología Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Listello, Viviana. Provincia de Córdoba. Hospital de Niños de la Santísima Trinidad. División de Alergia e Inmunología Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Slatter, Mary A.. Great North Children's Hospital; Reino UnidoFil: Nademi, Zohreh. Great North Children's Hospital; Reino UnidoFil: Kowalczyk, Danuta. Children's University Hospital. Department of Clinical Immunology and Transplantology; PoloniaFil: Fleisher, Thomas A.. National Institutes of Health; Estados UnidosFil: Davies, Graham. Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children; Reino UnidoFil: Neven, Bénédicte. Necker Hospital. Immunology-Hematology and Rheumatology Service; FranciaFil: Rosenzweig, Sergio D.. National Institute of Health. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious. Laboratory of Host Defenses. Primary Immunodeficiency Clinic and Infectious Diseases Susceptibility Unit; Estados Unido