Outcomes following posttransplant virus-specific T-cell therapy in patients with sickle cell disease.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is being increasingly used as a curative approach for sickle cell disease (SCD). With the risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), especially in the human leukocyte antigen-mismatched donors, intense immunosuppression is required leading to an increased risk of viral infection. Post-HSCT, adoptive transfer of virus-specific T-cell (VST) therapies have not been well-studied in patients with SCD. Here, we report the outcomes of patients with SCD at a single-center who received VSTs after transplant to prevent or treat viral infections. Thirteen patients who received HSCT from human leukocyte antigen-matched (n = 9) or -mismatched (n = 4) donors for SCD were treated with a total of 15 VST products for the treatment or prophylaxis of multiple viruses (cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, adenovirus, BK virus, human herpes virus 6 +/- human parainfluenza virus 3). Of the patients evaluated, 46.2% (n = 6)) received VSTs as treatment for viral infection. Eighty percent of patients with active viremia (n = 4/5) achieved remission of at least 1 target virus. Seven additional patients (53.8%) received VSTs prophylactically and 6 of 7 (85.7%) remained virus-free after infusion. No immediate infusion-related toxicities occurred, and severe de novo acute GVHD occurred in only 2 (15.4%) patients. Given the good safety profile, high-rate of clinical responses and sustained remissions when administered with standard antiviral treatments, the routine use of VSTs after HSCT as prophylaxis or treatment may improve the overall safety of transplant for patients with SCD.

Policy Facilitators Versus Structural Barriers: Integrative Therapy Telehealth Changes in the United States During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Introduction: Complementary and integrative therapies such as physical therapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) have been shown to improve functional outcomes and reduce opioid use. Due to the COVID-19 (or SARS-CoV-2 [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2]) pandemic, these therapies are switching to telehealth and telemedicine practices, but access and utilization may be limited due to state policies and social vulnerability. Objective: The objective of this cross-sectional analysis was to evaluate the policy changes to telehealth provisions during the pandemic and the degree to which structural barriers could stymie the intended impact of these policies (e.g., PT/OT accessibility). Materials and Methods: Our analysis examined each states' telehealth policies in relation to PT/OT, ranked their telehealth readiness, identified relationships between existing policies and opioid prescription rates, and discussed how social determinants of health may be associated with telehealth availability and accessibility. Results: Approximately two of five states have both telehealth and telemedicine policies, whereas the majority of states had either a PT- or OT-specific policy in place. In addition, almost all states and the District of Columbia (90%) had general telehealth/medicine policy changes as a result of the pandemic. Discussion: Although such policy changes could reduce COVID-19-related barriers, the degree to which these policies can have a large and long-lasting impact may be contingent on structural barriers. Many states that lack broadband access and have high social vulnerability need more improvements to ensure the utilization of telehealth care, including PT and OT. Conclusion: Despite the policies expanding PT/OT telehealth capabilities, structural barriers may further exacerbate inequities in care accessibility.