SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the first year after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant: a prospective, multicentre, observational study

Background The optimal timing for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines within the first year after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) is poorly understood. Methods We conducted a prospective, multicentre, observational study of allogeneic HCT recipients who initiated SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations within 12 months of HCT. Participants were enrolled at 22 academic cancer centers across the United States. Participants of any age who were planning to receive a first post-HCT SARS-CoV-2 vaccine within 12 months of HCT were eligible. We obtained blood prior to and after each vaccine dose for up to four vaccine doses, with an end-of-study sample seven to nine months after enrollment. We tested for SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (anti-S) IgG;nucleocapsid protein (anti-N) IgG;neutralizing antibodies for Wuhan D614G, Delta B.1.617.2, and Omicron B.1.1.529 strains;and SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell receptors (TCRs). The primary outcome was a comparison of anti-S IgG titers at the post-V2 time point in participants initiating vaccinations <4 months versus 4–12 months after HCT using a propensity-adjusted analysis. We also evaluated factors associated with high-level anti-S IgG titers (≥2403 U/mL) in logistic regression models. Findings Between April 22, 2021 and November 17, 2021, 175 allogeneic HCT recipients were enrolled in the study, of whom all but one received mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. SARS-CoV-2 anti-S IgG titers, neutralizing antibody titers, and TCR breadth and depth did not significantly differ at all tested time points following the second vaccination among those initiating vaccinations <4 months versus 4–12 months after HCT. Anti-S IgG ≥2403 U/mL correlated with neutralizing antibody levels similar to those observed in a prior study of non-immunocompromised individuals, and 57% of participants achieved anti-S IgG ≥2403 U/mL at the end-of-study time point. In models adjusted for SARS-CoV-2 infection pre-enrollment, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination pre-HCT, CD19+ B-cell count, CD4+ T-cell count, and age (as applicable to the model), vaccine initiation timing was not associated with high-level anti-S IgG titers at the post-V2, post-V3, or end-of-study time points. Notably, prior graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD) or use of immunosuppressive medications were not associated with high-level anti-S IgG titers. Grade ≥3 vaccine-associated adverse events were infrequent. Interpretation These data support starting mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination three months after HCT, irrespective of concurrent GVHD or use of immunosuppressive medications. This is one of the largest prospective analyses of vaccination for any pathogen within the first year after allogeneic HCT and supports current guidelines for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination starting three months post-HCT. Additionally, there are few studies of mRNA vaccine formulations for other pathogens in HCT recipients, and these data provide encouraging proof-of-concept for the utility of early vaccination targeting additional pathogens with mRNA vaccine platforms. Funding National Marrow Donor Program, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation, Novartis, LabCorp, American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, 10.13039/100016796Adaptive Biotechnologies, and the 10.13039/100000002National Institutes of Health.

Allogeneic transplant following CAR T-cell therapy for large B-cell lymphoma.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) can potentially salvage large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) patients experiencing treatment failure after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T). Nonetheless, data on the efficacy and toxicities of alloHCT after receipt of CAR-T are limited. We report a multicenter retrospective study assessing the safety, toxicities, and outcomes of alloHCT in LBCL patients following CAR-T failure. Eighty-eight patients with relapsed, refractory LBCL received an alloHCT following anti-CD19 CAR-T failure. The median number of lines of therapy between CAR-T infusion and alloHCT was 1 (range 0-7). Low intensity conditioning was used in 77% (n=68) and peripheral blood was the most common graft source (86%, n=76). The most common donor types were matched unrelated donor (39%), followed by haploidentical (30%) and matched related donor (26%). Median follow-up of survivors was 15 months (range 1-72). One-year overall survival, progression-free survival, and graft-versus-host disease-free relapse-free survival were 59%, 45%, and 39% respectively. One-year non-relapse mortality and progression/relapse were 22% and 33% respectively. On multivariate analysis.

Epidemiology of Food Insecurity in a Nationally Representative Sample of Lymphoma Patients.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, the United States had approximately 85,000 new diagnoses of Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Food insecurity is both a direct and indirect detriment to health outcomes. The rate and risk factors for food insecurity among lymphoma patients are unknown, as the unemployment rate soars far above pre-COVID19 pandemic levels further heightening the economic stresses of a lymphoma diagnosis. METHODS: Data regarding the food security status were obtained from the cross-sectional National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A raw score compiled from a series of 10 food security questions was used to determine the Food Secure and Food Insecure groups. Respondents who reported a history of lymphoma from 2011 to 2019 were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Of the 921 patients reporting a history of lymphoma 9.06% were considered Food Insecure. The sociodemographic subgroups with the highest risk of being Food Insecure included respondents living below 100% of the Federal Poverty Level, non-US citizens, the uninsured, and those on Medicare. CONCLUSION: Food insecurity is common among lymphoma patients. Therefore, oncologists across the country should be aware of the sociodemographic risk factors for food insecurity in order to assist in mediation, maximizing the efficacy of treatments. Research regarding the impact of food insecurity on therapy compliance and patient outcomes is warranted in future studies.

Bronchoalveolar lavage-based COVID-19 testing in patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: A few case reports in the setting of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based assays for common respiratory pathogens have shown a higher yield of bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples than upper airway specimens in immunocompromised patients. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted reviewing patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at the Medical College of Wisconsin (Milwaukee, WI, USA) between March 13, 2020 and June 11, 2020. All patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR), through a nasopharyngeal or a bronchoscopy specimen. RESULTS: During the study period, 53 bronchoscopy procedures were performed at the institution, of which five patients tested positive for COVID-19. Of the five patients, three underwent BAL testing based on high clinical suspicion for COVID-19 after the nasopharyngeal (NP) swab(s) was negative. All three patients had underlying cancers and had lymphopenia for a considerable duration prior to being diagnosed with COVID-19. Two patients had better outcomes that could be attributed to earlier BAL specimen testing resulting in timely medical intervention. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the need for early lower respiratory tract sampling, whenever possible, in patients with cancer and prolonged lymphopenia. High clinical suspicion ought to supersede false-negative NP reverse transcriptase-PCR as early bronchoscopic evaluation in cancer patients, who are either receiving active treatment or are immunosuppressed, can allow timely institution of efficacious treatment, enrollment into clinical trials, as well as effective infection control. In the apt clinical setting in patients with cancer, presumptive treatment may also be considered to minimize exposure to healthcare providers and proceduralists.

Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation with Cryopreserved Grafts for Severe Aplastic Anemia.

With the COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing barriers to the collection and transport of donor cells, it is often necessary to collect and cryopreserve grafts before initiation of transplantation conditioning. The effect on transplantation outcomes in nonmalignant disease is unknown. This analysis examined the effect of cryopreservation of related and unrelated donor grafts for transplantation for severe aplastic anemia in the United States during 2013 to 2019. Included are 52 recipients of cryopreserved grafts who were matched for age, donor type, and graft type to 194 recipients who received noncryopreserved grafts. Marginal Cox regression models were built to study the effect of cryopreservation and other risk factors associated with outcomes. We recorded higher 1-year rates of graft failure (hazard ratio [HR], 2.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.17 to 4.35; P = .01) and of 1-year overall mortality (HR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.60 to 6.11; P = .0008) after transplantation of cryopreserved compared with noncryopreserved grafts, with adjustment for sex, performance score, comorbidity, cytomegalovirus serostatus, and ABO blood group match. The incidence of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease did not differ between the 2 groups. Adjusted probabilities of 1-year survival were 73% (95% CI, 60% to 84%) in the cryopreserved graft group and 91% (95% CI, 86% to 94%) in the noncryopreserved graft group. These data support the use of noncryopreserved grafts whenever possible in patients with severe aplastic anemia.

Real-World Issues and Potential Solutions in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives from the Worldwide Network for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research Health Services and International Studies Committee.

The current COVID-19 pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has impacted many facets of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in both developed and developing countries. Realizing the challenges as a result of this pandemic affecting the daily practice of the HCT centers and the recognition of the variability in practice worldwide, the Worldwide Network for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (WBMT) and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research's (CIBMTR) Health Services and International Studies Committee have jointly produced an expert opinion statement as a general guide to deal with certain aspects of HCT, including diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 in HCT recipient, pre- and post-HCT management, donor issues, medical tourism, and facilities management. During these crucial times, which may last for months or years, the HCT community must reorganize to proceed with transplantation activity in those patients who urgently require it, albeit with extreme caution. This shared knowledge may be of value to the HCT community in the absence of high-quality evidence-based medicine. © 2020 American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Graft Cryopreservation Does Not Impact Overall Survival after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Using Post-Transplantation Cyclophosphamide for Graft-versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created significant barriers to timely donor evaluation, cell collection, and graft transport for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT). To ensure availability of donor cells on the scheduled date of infusion, many sites now collect cryopreserved grafts before the start of pretransplantation conditioning. Post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (ptCY) is an increasingly used approach for graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis, but the impact of graft cryopreservation on the outcomes of allo-HCT using ptCY is not known. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) database, we compared the outcomes of HCT using cryopreserved versus fresh grafts in patients undergoing HCT for hematologic malignancy with ptCY. We analyzed 274 patients with hematologic malignancy undergoing allo-HCT between 2013 and 2018 with cryopreserved grafts and ptCY. Eighteen patients received bone marrow grafts and 256 received peripheral blood stem cell grafts. These patients were matched for age, graft type, disease risk index (DRI), and propensity score with 1080 patients who underwent allo-HCT with fresh grafts. The propensity score, which is an assessment of the likelihood of receiving a fresh graft versus a cryopreserved graft, was calculated using logistic regression to account for the following: disease histology, Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS), HCT Comorbidity Index, conditioning regimen intensity, donor type, and recipient race. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse/progression and disease-free survival (DFS). Because of multiple comparisons, only P values <.01 were considered statistically significant. The 2 cohorts (cryopreserved and fresh) were similar in terms of patient age, KPS, diagnosis, DRI, HCT-CI, donor/graft source, and conditioning intensity. One-year probabilities of OS were 71.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 68.3% to 73.8%) with fresh grafts and 70.3% (95% CI, 64.6% to 75.7%) with cryopreserved grafts (P = .81). Corresponding probabilities of OS at 2 years were 60.6% (95% CI, 57.3% to 63.8%) and 58.7% (95% CI, 51.9% to 65.4%) (P = .62). In matched-pair regression analysis, graft cryopreservation was not associated with a significantly higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] for cryopreserved versus fresh, 1.05; 95% CI, .86 to 1.29; P = .60). Similarly, rates of neutrophil recovery (HR, .91; 95% CI, .80 to 1.02; P = .12), platelet recovery (HR, .88; 95% CI, .78 to 1.00; P = .05), grade III-IV acute GVHD (HR, .78; 95% CI, .50 to 1.22; P = .27), NRM (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, .86 to 1.55; P = .32) and relapse/progression (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, .97 to 1.50; P = .09) were similar with cryopreserved grafts versus fresh grafts. There were somewhat lower rates of chronic GVHD (HR, 78; 95% CI, .61 to .99; P = .04) and DFS (HR for treatment failure, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.29; P = .04) with graft cryopreservation that were of marginal statistical significance after adjusting for multiple comparisons. Overall, our data indicate that graft cryopreservation does not significantly delay hematopoietic recovery, increase the risk of acute GVHD or NRM, or decrease OS after allo-HCT using ptCY.