Browsing by Author "Nishihori, Taiga"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Human leukocyte antigen supertype matching after myeloablative hematopoietic cell transplantation with 7/8 matched unrelated donor allografts: a report from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research.
    (Haematologica, 2016-10) Lazaryan, Aleksandr; Wang, Tao; Spellman, Stephen R; Wang, Hai-Lin; Pidala, Joseph; Nishihori, Taiga; Askar, Medhat; Olsson, Richard; Oudshoorn, Machteld; Abdel-Azim, Hisham; Yong, Agnes; Gandhi, Manish; Dandoy, Christopher; Savani, Bipin; Hale, Gregory; Page, Kristin; Bitan, Menachem; Reshef, Ran; Drobyski, William; Marsh, Steven Ge; Schultz, Kirk; Müller, Carlheinz R; Fernandez-Viña, Marcelo A; Verneris, Michael R; Horowitz, Mary M; Arora, Mukta; Weisdorf, Daniel J; Lee, Stephanie J
    The diversity of the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I and II alleles can be simplified by consolidating them into fewer supertypes based on functional or predicted structural similarities in epitope-binding grooves of HLA molecules. We studied the impact of matched and mismatched HLA-A (265 versus 429), -B (230 versus 92), -C (365 versus 349), and -DRB1 (153 versus 51) supertypes on clinical outcomes of 1934 patients with acute leukemias or myelodysplasia/myeloproliferative disorders. All patients were reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research following single-allele mismatched unrelated donor myeloablative conditioning hematopoietic cell transplantation. Single mismatched alleles were categorized into six HLA-A (A01, A01A03, A01A24, A02, A03, A24), six HLA-B (B07, B08, B27, B44, B58, B62), two HLA-C (C1, C2), and five HLA-DRB1 (DR1, DR3, DR4, DR5, DR9) supertypes. Supertype B mismatch was associated with increased risk of grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease (hazard ratio =1.78, P=0.0025) compared to supertype B match. Supertype B07-B44 mismatch was associated with a higher incidence of both grade II-IV (hazard ratio=3.11, P=0.002) and III-IV (hazard ratio=3.15, P=0.01) acute graft-versus-host disease. No significant associations were detected between supertype-matched versus -mismatched groups at other HLA loci. These data suggest that avoiding HLA-B supertype mismatches can mitigate the risk of grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease in 7/8-mismatched unrelated donor hematopoietic cell transplantation when multiple HLA-B supertype-matched donors are available. Future studies are needed to define the mechanisms by which supertype mismatching affects outcomes after alternative donor hematopoietic cell transplantation.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Standardizing Definitions of Hematopoietic Recovery, Graft Rejection, Graft Failure, Poor Graft Function, and Donor Chimerism in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Report on Behalf of the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy.
    (Transplantation and cellular therapy, 2021-08) Kharfan-Dabaja, Mohamed A; Kumar, Ambuj; Ayala, Ernesto; Aljurf, Mahmoud; Nishihori, Taiga; Marsh, Rebecca; Burroughs, Lauri M; Majhail, Navneet; Al-Homsi, A Samer; Al-Kadhimi, Zaid S; Bar, Merav; Bertaina, Alice; Boelens, Jaap J; Champlin, Richard; Chaudhury, Sonali; DeFilipp, Zachariah; Dholaria, Bhagirathbhai; El-Jawahri, Areej; Fanning, Suzanne; Fraint, Ellen; Gergis, Usama; Giralt, Sergio; Hamilton, Betty K; Hashmi, Shahrukh K; Horn, Biljana; Inamoto, Yoshihiro; Jacobsohn, David A; Jain, Tania; Johnston, Laura; Kanate, Abraham S; Kansagra, Ankit; Kassim, Adetola; Kean, Leslie S; Kitko, Carrie L; Knight-Perry, Jessica; Kurtzberg, Joanne; Liu, Hien; MacMillan, Margaret L; Mahmoudjafari, Zahra; Mielcarek, Marco; Mohty, Mohamad; Nagler, Arnon; Nemecek, Eneida; Olson, Timothy S; Oran, Betul; Perales, Miguel-Angel; Prockop, Susan E; Pulsipher, Michael A; Pusic, Iskra; Riches, Marcie L; Rodriguez, Cesar; Romee, Rizwan; Rondon, Gabriela; Saad, Ayman; Shah, Nina; Shaw, Peter J; Shenoy, Shalini; Sierra, Jorge; Talano, Julie; Verneris, Michael R; Veys, Paul; Wagner, John E; Savani, Bipin N; Hamadani, Mehdi; Carpenter, Paul A
    Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is potentially curative for certain hematologic malignancies and nonmalignant diseases. The field of allo-HCT has witnessed significant advances, including broadening indications for transplantation, availability of alternative donor sources, less toxic preparative regimens, new cell manipulation techniques, and novel GVHD prevention methods, all of which have expanded the applicability of the procedure. These advances have led to clinical practice conundrums when applying traditional definitions of hematopoietic recovery, graft rejection, graft failure, poor graft function, and donor chimerism, because these may vary based on donor type, cell source, cell dose, primary disease, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis, and conditioning intensity, among other variables. To address these contemporary challenges, we surveyed a panel of allo-HCT experts in an attempt to standardize these definitions. We analyzed survey responses from adult and pediatric transplantation physicians separately. Consensus was achieved for definitions of neutrophil and platelet recovery, graft rejection, graft failure, poor graft function, and donor chimerism, but not for delayed engraftment. Here we highlight the complexities associated with the management of mixed donor chimerism in malignant and nonmalignant hematologic diseases, which remains an area for future research. We recognize that there are multiple other specific, and at times complex, clinical scenarios for which clinical management must be individualized.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Survival following allogeneic transplant in patients with myelofibrosis.
    (Blood advances, 2020-05) Gowin, Krisstina; Ballen, Karen; Ahn, Kwang Woo; Hu, Zhen-Huan; Ali, Haris; Arcasoy, Murat O; Devlin, Rebecca; Coakley, Maria; Gerds, Aaron T; Green, Michael; Gupta, Vikas; Hobbs, Gabriela; Jain, Tania; Kandarpa, Malathi; Komrokji, Rami; Kuykendall, Andrew T; Luber, Kierstin; Masarova, Lucia; Michaelis, Laura C; Patches, Sarah; Pariser, Ashley C; Rampal, Raajit; Stein, Brady; Talpaz, Moshe; Verstovsek, Srdan; Wadleigh, Martha; Agrawal, Vaibhav; Aljurf, Mahmoud; Angel Diaz, Miguel; Avalos, Belinda R; Bacher, Ulrike; Bashey, Asad; Beitinjaneh, Amer M; Cerny, Jan; Chhabra, Saurabh; Copelan, Edward; Cutler, Corey S; DeFilipp, Zachariah; Gadalla, Shahinaz M; Ganguly, Siddhartha; Grunwald, Michael R; Hashmi, Shahrukh K; Kharfan-Dabaja, Mohamed A; Kindwall-Keller, Tamila; Kröger, Nicolaus; Lazarus, Hillard M; Liesveld, Jane L; Litzow, Mark R; Marks, David I; Nathan, Sunita; Nishihori, Taiga; Olsson, Richard F; Pawarode, Attaphol; Rowe, Jacob M; Savani, Bipin N; Savoie, Mary Lynn; Seo, Sachiko; Solh, Melhem; Tamari, Roni; Verdonck, Leo F; Yared, Jean A; Alyea, Edwin; Popat, Uday; Sobecks, Ronald; Scott, Bart L; Nakamura, Ryotaro; Mesa, Ruben; Saber, Wael
    Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is the only curative therapy for myelofibrosis (MF). In this large multicenter retrospective study, overall survival (OS) in MF patients treated with allogeneic HCT (551 patients) and without HCT (non-HCT) (1377 patients) was analyzed with Cox proportional hazards model. Survival analysis stratified by the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) revealed that the first year of treatment arm assignment, due to upfront risk of transplant-related mortality (TRM), HCT was associated with inferior OS compared with non-HCT (non-HCT vs HCT: DIPSS intermediate 1 [Int-1]: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.26, P < .0001; DIPSS-Int-2 and higher: HR, 0.39, P < .0001). Similarly, in the DIPSS low-risk MF group, due to upfront TRM risk, OS was superior with non-HCT therapies compared with HCT in the first-year post treatment arm assignment (HR, 0.16, P = .006). However, after 1 year, OS was not significantly different (HR, 1.38, P = .451). Beyond 1 year of treatment arm assignment, an OS advantage with HCT therapy in Int-1 and higher DIPSS score patients was observed (non-HCT vs HCT: DIPSS-Int-1: HR, 2.64, P < .0001; DIPSS-Int-2 and higher: HR, 2.55, P < .0001). In conclusion, long-term OS advantage with HCT was observed for patients with Int-1 or higher risk MF, but at the cost of early TRM. The magnitude of OS benefit with HCT increased as DIPSS risk score increased and became apparent with longer follow-up.