haploidentical hematopoietic stem cells transplantation

Infectious Complications after Haploidentical Hematopoietic Stem Cells Transplantation in Patients with High-Risk Tumors of Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues: A Single-Center Experience

BONE MARROW TRANSPLANTATION , , , , ,

YuS Osipov1, SS Bessmeltsev2, GN Salogub1, VV Ivanov1, ES Mikhailov1, NA Zhukova1, AV Chechetkin2

1 VA Almazov National Medical Research Center, 2 Akkuratova str., Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, 197341

2 Russian Research Institute of Hematology and Transfusiology, 16 2-ya Sovetskaya str., Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, 191024

For correspondence: Yurii Sergeevich Osipov, 2 Akkuratova str., Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, 197341; Tel.: +7(812)702-37-65; e-mail: osipov_yus@almazovcentre.ru

For citation: Osipov YuS, Bessmeltsev SS, Salogub GN, et al. Infectious Complications after Haploidentical Hematopoietic Stem Cells Transplantation in Patients with High-Risk Tumors of Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues: A Single-Center Experience. Clinical oncohematology. 2019;12(4):406–15 (In Russ).

DOI: 10.21320/2500-2139-2019-12-4-406-415

ABSTRACT

Aim. To determine the incidence of viral, bacterial, and fungal infections in post-transplant period and to assess the prognostic value of infections and their influence on early and long-term results of haploidentical hematopoietic stem cells transplantation (haplo-HSCT).

Materials & Methods. Retrospective study included 61 patients older than 18 years with high-risk oncohematological diseases. In the period from 2015 to 2018 all patients received haplo-HSCT. Median follow-up after haplo-HSCT was 12.5 months (376 days, range 6–1202). Patients were divided into two groups. The first group (n = 26) received haplo-HSCT as salvage therapy. It included patients with refractory tumors without remission by the start of haplo-HSCT and patients with early relapses after HLA-matched related or unrelated allo-HSCT. The second group (n = 35) received haplo-HSCT on reaching the optimal pretransplant status (“non-salvage”).

Results. The incidence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation, invasive mycosis, and bacterial infections was 70.4 %, 11.5 %, and 75.4 %, respectively. CMV reactivation and invasive mycosis did not affect either the 35- or the 100-day overall survival (OS). For the first time bacterial infections were stratified based on severity according to Sepsis 3 consensus, which allowed to identify groups of patients with unfavorable prognosis. Severe bacterial infections (sepsis and septic shock) correlated with worse early and long-term results, especially in patients without remission by the start of haplo-HSCT, whereas febrile neutropenia/bloodstream infection did not affect OS. On the whole, mortality associated with bacterial infections was 26.2 %.

Conclusion. The main factor affecting early lethality after haplo-HSCT is a severe bacterial infection. The key risk factor is lack of remission by the start of haplo-HSCT. Sepsis 3 criteria can be applied in the period of postcytostatic cytopenia to identify the group of patients with most unfavorable prognosis (septic shock). The implementation of current infection control methods (genotyping of multiple drug resistant strains and timely determining the strategy of antimicrobial chemotherapy on the basis of the results obtained) into everyday clinical practice can improve the treatment outcomes in this category of patients.

Keywords: haploidentical hematopoietic stem cells transplantation, infectious complications, sepsis, septic shock, cytomegalovirus reactivation, invasive mycosis.

Received: April 11, 2019

Accepted: September 18, 2019

Read in PDF

REFERENCES

  1. Поп В.П., Рукавицын О.А. Аллогенная трансплантация гемопоэтических стволовых клеток: перспективы и альтернативы, собственный опыт. Российский журнал детской онкологии и гематологии. 2017;4(2):46–69. doi: 10.17650/2311-1267-2017-4-2-46-69.

    [Pop VР, Rukavitsyn OА. Allogeneic transplantation of hematopoietic stem cells: Perspectives and alternatives, own experience. Russian Journal of Children Hematology and Oncology. 2017;4(2):46–69. doi: 10.17650/2311-1267-2017-4-2-46-69. (In Russ)]

  2. Luznik L, O’Donnell PV, Ephraim JF. Post-transplantation cyclophosphamide for tolerance induction in HLA-haploidentical Bone Marrow Transplantation. Semin Oncol. 2012;39(6):683–93. doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2012.09.005.

  3. Luznik L, Fuchs EJ. High-dose, post-transplantation cyclophosphamide to promote graft-host tolerance after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Immunol Res. 2010;47(1–3):65–77. doi: 10.1007/s12026-009-8139-0.

  4. Burroughs LМ, O’Donnell PV, Sandmaier BM, et al. Comparison of outcomes of HLA-matched related, unrelated, or HLA-haploidentical related hematopoietic cell transplantation following non-myeloablative conditioning for relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008;14(11):1279–87. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2008.08.014.

  5. Pagliardini T, Harbi S, Furst S, et al. Post-transplantation cyclophosphamide-based haploidentical versus Atg-based unrelated donor allogeneic stem cell transplantation for patients younger than 60 years with hematological malignancies: a single-center experience of 209 patients. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2018;54(7):1067–76. doi: 10.1038/s41409-018-0387-y.

  6. Kasamon Y, Luznik L, Leffell M, et al. Nonmyeloablative HLA-haploidentical Bone Marrow Transplantation with high-dose post-transplantation cyclophosphamide: effect of HLA disparity on outcome. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010;16(4):482–9. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2009.11.01

  7. Бессмельцев С.С., Абдулкадыров К.М. Множественная миелома: руководство для врачей. М.: СИМК, 2016. 512 с.

    [Bessmeltsev SS, Abdulkadyrov KM. Mnozhestvennaya mieloma: rukovodstvo dlya vrachei. (Multiple myeloma: manual for physicians.) Moscow: SIMK Publ.; 2016. 512 p. (In Russ)]

  8. Галстян Г.М., Макарова П.М., Кузьмина Л.А. и др. Успешная трансплантация аллогенного костного мозга у больных с тяжелым грамотрицательным сепсисом и септическим шоком. Клиническая онкогематология. 2014;7(2):122–30.

    [Galstyan GM, Makarova PM, Kuzmina LA, et al. Successful allogeneic bone marrow transplantation in patients with severe gram-negative sepsis and septic shock. Klinicheskaya onkogematologiya. 2014;7(2):122–30. (In Russ)]

  9. Fayard A, Daguenet E, Blaise D, et al. Evaluation of infectious complications after haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation with post-transplant cyclophosphamide following reduced-intensity and myeloablative conditioning: a study on behalf of the Francophone Society of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (SFGM-TC). Bone Marrow Transplant. 2019. [ahead of print] doi: 10.1038/s41409-019-0475-7.

  10. Kumar G, Ahmad S, Taneja A, et al. Severe sepsis in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(2):411–21. doi: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000000714.

  11. Omrani AS, Almaghrabi RS. Complications of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: Bacterial infections. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther. 2017;10(4):228–32. doi: 10.1016/j.hemonc.2017.05.018.

  12. Alhemmari SH, Refaat SM, Abdullah AA, Abul M. Infectious complications after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation: Sheikha Badryia Center, Kuwait. Gulf J Oncol. 2015;1(18):79–86.

  13. Freifeld AG, Bow EJ, Sepkowitz KA, et al. Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 update by the infectious diseases society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52(4):е56–е93. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir073.

  14. EORTC International Antimicrobial Therapy Cooperative Group. Gram-positive bacteraemia in granulocytopenic cancer patients. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol. 1990;26(5):569–74. doi: 10.1016/0277-5379(90)90079-9.

  15. Klastersky J. Science and pragmatism in the treatment and prevention of neutropenic infection. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1998;41(Suppl 4):13–24. doi: 10.1093/jac/41.suppl_4.13.

  16. Mikulska M, Viscoli C, Orasch C, et al. Aetiology and resistance in bacteraemias among adult and paediatric haematology and cancer patients. J Infect. 2014;68(4):321–31. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2013.12.006.

  17. Tomblyn M, Chiller T, Einsele H, et al. Guidelines for preventing infectious complications among hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients: a global perspective. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009;15(10):1143–238. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2009.06.019.

  18. De Pauw B, Walsh TJ, Donnelly JP, et al. Revised Definitions of Invasive Fungal Disease from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) Consensus Group. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46(12):1813–21. doi: 10.1086/588660.

  19. Abraham E. New Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock: Continuing Evolution but With Much Still to Be Done. JAMA. 2016;315(8):757–9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0290.

  20. Gustinetti G, Mikulska M. Bloodstream infections in neutropenic cancer patients: a practical update. Virulence. 2016;7(3):280–97. doi: 10.1080/21505594.2016.1156821.

  21. Wisplinghoff H, Seifert H, Wenzel RP, Edmond MB. Current trends in the epidemiology of nosocomial bloodstream infections in patients with hematological malignancies and solid neoplasms in hospitals in the United States. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36(9):1103–10. doi: 10.1086/374339.