Cryopreservation of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Grafts Did Not Adversely Affect Early Post-Transplant Survival during the First Six Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Authors: Devine Steven , Kuxhausen Michelle , Spellman Stephen R. , Fretham Caitrin , Woo Ahn Kwang , Stefanski Heather E. , Auletta Jeffery J. , Logan Brent R. , Shaw Bronwen E. 
Published: November 2021

Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns regarding travel logistics and donor safety necessitated a substantial increase in the use of cryopreserved hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) grafts from both related (RD) and unrelated donors (URD) to ensure patients have a graft available prior to the start of conditioning for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). However, pre-pandemic data beyond single center or small multi-center reports are lacking to reassure clinicians that cryopreservation of allogeneic grafts does not adversely impact post-HCT outcomes including hematopoietic engraftment and overall survival (OS). The Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) has recently published three retrospective analyses of outcomes in recipients of cryopreserved compared to fresh grafts administered prior to the pandemic. Results have been conflicting and reasons for receipt of cryopreserved grafts were not routinely collected, rendering interpretation of the impact of cryopreservation on clinical outcomes problematic. Since the pandemic provided a unifying rationale (including mandatory cryopreservation required by the National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP) and other major registries) for the majority of patients to receive cryopreserved allografts, we sought to evaluate early post-HCT clinical outcomes in patients reported to the CIBMTR database who received a first allogeneic HCT using cryopreserved grafts from March through August 2020.

Methods: Key study endpoints were hematopoietic engraftment and overall survival (OS). We compared these outcomes to those in patients allografted using fresh products transplanted between March through August 2019. Additional patient selection criteria included: 1) recipients in US only, 2) peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) or bone marrow (BM) grafts, 3) consented to research, and 4) availability of both CIBMTR product infusion and post-HCT day 100 (D100) follow-up form. The Pearson chi-square test was used for comparing discrete variables; the Kruskal-Wallis test was used for comparing continuous variables. Multivariate analysis (MVA) using a Cox proportional hazards model was performed for OS after adjusting for confounders and testing the proportional hazards assumption. Neutrophil engraftment by D28 and platelet engraftment by D100 were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression.

Results: This study included 959 and 2,499 recipients of cryopreserved and fresh products, respectively. Patient characteristics are presented in Table 1. Recipients of cryopreserved grafts were older, more likely to receive URD grafts, PBSC as the graft source and post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) for graft versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis. They received lower infused PBSC and BM cell doses. Due to differences in duration of follow-up between the cohorts, follow up for the OS analysis was censored at Days 100 and 180. MVA results are presented in Table 2. No impact of cryopreservation on OS at either D100 (HR 0.93, p=0.72) or D180 (HR 1.10, p=0.34) post HCT was detected (see also Figure 1). When we performed the MVA for OS limiting the analysis to URD recipients only, the results were unchanged. Median time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment were both delayed by 1 day in recipients of cryopreserved grafts (16 vs. 15 days and 21 vs. 20 days, respectively) but there was no difference in the risk of primary graft failure by D28 (OR 1.38, p=0.96). Some delay in D100 platelet engraftment was observed in recipients of cryopreserved grafts (OR 0.67, p&lt;0.005). There were no interactions identified between donor or graft type for OS or engraftment. Other important clinical outcomes such as secondary graft failure, acute GVHD, and early relapse are being analyzed and will be included at the time of abstract presentation.

Conclusion: The shift in clinical practice to cryopreserved products necessitated during the pandemic did not adversely impact early post HCT OS or risk of primary graft failure. We caution that follow up is short and it will be critical to follow this cohort and subsequent recipients of cryopreserved grafts for much longer periods to determine the ultimate impact of cryopreservation on outcomes. Nevertheless, this large multi-center study will be useful to inform clinical decision making both during and following the pandemic.

Figure 1 Figure 1.

Disclosures

Devine: Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Magenta Therapeutics: Current Employment, Research Funding; Tmunity: Current Employment, Research Funding; Vor Bio: Research Funding; Kiadis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Johnsonand Johnson: Consultancy, Research Funding; Orca Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Be the Match: Current Employment. Stefanski: Novartis: Honoraria. Shaw: mallinkrodt: Other: payments; Orca bio: Consultancy.