Comparison of engraftment and acute GVHD in patients undergoing cryopreserved or fresh allogeneic BMT

J. R. Eckardt, G. David Roodman, D. H. Boldt, G. M. Clark, R. Alvarez, C. Page, H. Gaskill, C. F. LeMaistre

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Coordination of marrow donation for allogeneic BMT is a common logistical problem. The use of cryopreserved donor marrow would facilitate scheduling and avoid potential problems due to donor employment, injury, infection or death. We analysed results of 10 matched related BMTs performed with cryopreserved donor marrow and compared them with 33 matched related BMTs using fresh bone marrow over a 4 year period. No difference in time to engraftment of granulocytes and platelets or transfusion requirements were demonstrated for the two groups. However, there was less GVHD in patients who received cryopreserved donor marrow (χ2, p = 0.03; Fisher's exact test (two-sided) p = 0.067) despite comparable risk factors. The reason for this difference is unclear. Our results indicate that the use of cryopreserved bone marrow for allogeneic BMT patients is at least equivalent to the use of fresh bone marrow. A prospective randomized trial is needed to determine if a true difference exists in the incidence or severity of acute GVHD and to determine if recurrence rate is different between the two groups.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)125-131
Number of pages7
JournalBone Marrow Transplantation
Volume11
Issue number2
StatePublished - 1993
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Bone Marrow
Tissue Donors
Platelet Transfusion
Granulocytes
Recurrence
Incidence
Wounds and Injuries
Infection

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hematology
  • Transplantation

Cite this

Eckardt, J. R., Roodman, G. D., Boldt, D. H., Clark, G. M., Alvarez, R., Page, C., ... LeMaistre, C. F. (1993). Comparison of engraftment and acute GVHD in patients undergoing cryopreserved or fresh allogeneic BMT. Bone Marrow Transplantation, 11(2), 125-131.

Comparison of engraftment and acute GVHD in patients undergoing cryopreserved or fresh allogeneic BMT. / Eckardt, J. R.; Roodman, G. David; Boldt, D. H.; Clark, G. M.; Alvarez, R.; Page, C.; Gaskill, H.; LeMaistre, C. F.

In: Bone Marrow Transplantation, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1993, p. 125-131.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Eckardt, JR, Roodman, GD, Boldt, DH, Clark, GM, Alvarez, R, Page, C, Gaskill, H & LeMaistre, CF 1993, 'Comparison of engraftment and acute GVHD in patients undergoing cryopreserved or fresh allogeneic BMT', Bone Marrow Transplantation, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 125-131.
Eckardt, J. R. ; Roodman, G. David ; Boldt, D. H. ; Clark, G. M. ; Alvarez, R. ; Page, C. ; Gaskill, H. ; LeMaistre, C. F. / Comparison of engraftment and acute GVHD in patients undergoing cryopreserved or fresh allogeneic BMT. In: Bone Marrow Transplantation. 1993 ; Vol. 11, No. 2. pp. 125-131.
@article{fcf37245c81f4f3796a1e9d7d5510b27,
title = "Comparison of engraftment and acute GVHD in patients undergoing cryopreserved or fresh allogeneic BMT",
abstract = "Coordination of marrow donation for allogeneic BMT is a common logistical problem. The use of cryopreserved donor marrow would facilitate scheduling and avoid potential problems due to donor employment, injury, infection or death. We analysed results of 10 matched related BMTs performed with cryopreserved donor marrow and compared them with 33 matched related BMTs using fresh bone marrow over a 4 year period. No difference in time to engraftment of granulocytes and platelets or transfusion requirements were demonstrated for the two groups. However, there was less GVHD in patients who received cryopreserved donor marrow (χ2, p = 0.03; Fisher's exact test (two-sided) p = 0.067) despite comparable risk factors. The reason for this difference is unclear. Our results indicate that the use of cryopreserved bone marrow for allogeneic BMT patients is at least equivalent to the use of fresh bone marrow. A prospective randomized trial is needed to determine if a true difference exists in the incidence or severity of acute GVHD and to determine if recurrence rate is different between the two groups.",
author = "Eckardt, {J. R.} and Roodman, {G. David} and Boldt, {D. H.} and Clark, {G. M.} and R. Alvarez and C. Page and H. Gaskill and LeMaistre, {C. F.}",
year = "1993",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "125--131",
journal = "Bone Marrow Transplantation",
issn = "0268-3369",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of engraftment and acute GVHD in patients undergoing cryopreserved or fresh allogeneic BMT

AU - Eckardt, J. R.

AU - Roodman, G. David

AU - Boldt, D. H.

AU - Clark, G. M.

AU - Alvarez, R.

AU - Page, C.

AU - Gaskill, H.

AU - LeMaistre, C. F.

PY - 1993

Y1 - 1993

N2 - Coordination of marrow donation for allogeneic BMT is a common logistical problem. The use of cryopreserved donor marrow would facilitate scheduling and avoid potential problems due to donor employment, injury, infection or death. We analysed results of 10 matched related BMTs performed with cryopreserved donor marrow and compared them with 33 matched related BMTs using fresh bone marrow over a 4 year period. No difference in time to engraftment of granulocytes and platelets or transfusion requirements were demonstrated for the two groups. However, there was less GVHD in patients who received cryopreserved donor marrow (χ2, p = 0.03; Fisher's exact test (two-sided) p = 0.067) despite comparable risk factors. The reason for this difference is unclear. Our results indicate that the use of cryopreserved bone marrow for allogeneic BMT patients is at least equivalent to the use of fresh bone marrow. A prospective randomized trial is needed to determine if a true difference exists in the incidence or severity of acute GVHD and to determine if recurrence rate is different between the two groups.

AB - Coordination of marrow donation for allogeneic BMT is a common logistical problem. The use of cryopreserved donor marrow would facilitate scheduling and avoid potential problems due to donor employment, injury, infection or death. We analysed results of 10 matched related BMTs performed with cryopreserved donor marrow and compared them with 33 matched related BMTs using fresh bone marrow over a 4 year period. No difference in time to engraftment of granulocytes and platelets or transfusion requirements were demonstrated for the two groups. However, there was less GVHD in patients who received cryopreserved donor marrow (χ2, p = 0.03; Fisher's exact test (two-sided) p = 0.067) despite comparable risk factors. The reason for this difference is unclear. Our results indicate that the use of cryopreserved bone marrow for allogeneic BMT patients is at least equivalent to the use of fresh bone marrow. A prospective randomized trial is needed to determine if a true difference exists in the incidence or severity of acute GVHD and to determine if recurrence rate is different between the two groups.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027461055&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027461055&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8435661

AN - SCOPUS:0027461055

VL - 11

SP - 125

EP - 131

JO - Bone Marrow Transplantation

JF - Bone Marrow Transplantation

SN - 0268-3369

IS - 2

ER -