Cost and quality issues in establishing hematopoietic cell transplant program in developing countries

The hematopoietic cell transplant [HCT] activity has grown significantly over the past two decades in both developing and developed countries. Many challenges arise in establishing new HCT programs in developing countries, due to scarcity of resources and manpower in expertise in HCT. While cost issues can potentially hinder establishment of new HCT programs in certain regions, the focus on quality and value should be included in the general vision of leadership before establishing an HCT program. The main challenge in most developing countries is the lack of trained/qualified personnel, enormous start-up costs for a tertiary care center, and quality maintenance. Herein, we discuss the main challenges from a cost and quality perspective which occur at initiation of a new HCT program. We give real world examples of two developing countries that have recently started new HCT programs despite significant financial constraints. We also portray recommendations from the Worldwide Network of Blood and Marrow Transplantation for levels of requirements for a new HCT program. We hope that this review will serve as a general guide for new transplant program leadership with respect to the concerns of balancing high quality with concurrently lowering costs

Establishing an autologous versus allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant program in nations with emerging economies

More than 70,000 hematopoietic cell transplants are currently performed each year, and these continue to increase every year. However, there is a significant variation in the number of absolute transplants and transplant rates between centers, countries, and global regions. The prospect for emerging countries to develop a hematopoietic cell transplantation [HCT] program, as well as to decide on whether autologous HCT [auto-HCT] or allogeneic HCT [allo-HCT] should be established to start with, relies heavily on factors that can explain differences between these two procedures. Major factors that will influence a decision about establishing the type of HCT program are macroeconomic factors such as organization of the healthcare network, available resources and infrastructure. Prevalence of specific diseases in the region as well genetic background of donors and recipients will also influence the mandate or priority of the HCT in the national healthcare plan to explain some of the country-specific differences. Furthermore, microeconomic factors play a role, such as center-specific experience in treating various disorders requiring hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, along with accreditation status and patient volume. The objective of the transplant procedure was to improve the survival and quality of life of patients. The regional difference that one notices in emerging countries about the higher number of allo-HCT compared with auto-HCT procedures performed is primarily based on suboptimal healthcare network in treating various malignant disorders that are the primary indication for auto-stem cell transplantation. In this context, nonmalignant disorders such as bone marrow failure syndromes, inherited genetic disorders and hemoglobinopathies have become the major indication for stem cell transplantation. Better understanding of these factors will assist in establishing new transplant centers in the emerging countries to achieve their specific objectives and positive outcome

Extracorporeal photopheresis for chronic graft-versus-host disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The safety of extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) in steroid-refractory chronic graft-versus-host disease (SR-cGVHD) has been explored in multiple studies but reported response rates (RR) vary significantly across studies. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of ECP for SR-cGVHD. A search of electronic databases for studies published between 1984 and 2012 was conducted. End points included RR: complete response (CR), overall response rates (ORR), and organ-specific RR. The initial search generated 312 studies, of which 18 met the selection criteria (N=595). A random effects model was used for pooled rates. RESULTS: Pooled CR rates and ORR were 29% (confidence interval [CI], 19-42%) and 64% (CI, 65-82%), respectively. One-year overall survival was available for 4 studies only and was 49% (CI, 29-70%). The pooled RR for skin, liver, ocular, oral, lung, gastrointestinal and musculoskeletal SR-cGVHD was 74%, 68%, 60%, 72%, 48%, 53%, and 64%, respectively. There was a significant heterogeneity among studies due to differences in ECP schedules and duration. No significant differences in responses to ECP for pediatric and adult populations were found. Sensitivity analysis could not be undertaken due to a limited number of prospective studies. CONCLUSION: ECP is an effective therapy for oral, skin, and liver SR-cGVHD, with modest activity in lung and gastrointestinal SR-cGVHD.