Graft-versus-host disease primary prevention: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
Line 17: Line 17:
==References==
==References==
{{reflist|2}}
{{reflist|2}}
{{WS}}
{{WH}}


[[Category:Primary care]]
[[Category:Primary care]]
[[Category:Disease]]
[[Category:Hematology]]
[[Category:Hematology]]
[[Category:Blood disorders]]
[[Category:Immunology]]

Revision as of 16:08, 17 June 2016

Graft-versus-host disease

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical Perspective

Classification

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Graft-versus-host disease from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Screening

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Diagnosis

Diagnostic Study of Choice

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Laboratory Findings

Electrocardiogram

Chest X Ray

Echocardiograph and Ultrasound

CT

MRI

Other Imaging Findings

Other Diagnostic Studies

Treatment

Medical Therapy

Surgery

Primary Prevention

Secondary Prevention

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Future or Investigational Therapies

Case Studies

Case #1

Graft-versus-host disease primary prevention On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

Images

American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Graft-versus-host disease primary prevention

All Images
X-rays
Echo & Ultrasound
CT Images
MRI

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA on Graft-versus-host disease primary prevention

CDC on Graft-versus-host disease primary prevention

Graft-versus-host disease primary prevention in the news

Blogs on Graft-versus-host disease primary prevention

Directions to Hospitals Treating Type page name here

Risk calculators and risk factors for Graft-versus-host disease primary prevention

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]

Overview

Primary Prevention

  • DNA-based tissue typing allows for more precise HLA matching between donors and transplant patients, which has been proven to reduce the incidence and severity of GVHD and to increase long-term survival.[1].
  • The T-cells of umbilical cord blood (UCB) have an inherent immunological immaturity[2], and the use of UCB stem cells in unrelated donor transplants has a reduced incidence and severity of GVHD[3].
  • Graft-versus-host-disease can largely be avoided by performing a T-cell depleted bone marrow transplant. However these types of transplants come at a cost of diminished graft-versus-tumor effect, greater risk of engraftment failure or cancer relapse[4], and general immunodeficiency, resulting in a patient more susceptible to viral, bacterial, and fungal infection. In a multi-center study, disease-free survival at 3 years was not different between T cell depleted and T cell replete transplants[5].

References

  1. Morishima Y, Sasazuki T, Inoko H; et al. (2002). "The clinical significance of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) allele compatibility in patients receiving a marrow transplant from serologically HLA-A, HLA-B, and HLA-DR matched unrelated donors". Blood. 99 (11): 4200–6. PMID 12010826.
  2. Grewal SS, Barker JN, Davies SM, Wagner JE (2003). "Unrelated donor hematopoietic cell transplantation: marrow or umbilical cord blood?". Blood. 101 (11): 4233–44. doi:10.1182/blood-2002-08-2510. PMID 12522002.
  3. Laughlin MJ, Barker J, Bambach B; et al. (2001). "Hematopoietic engraftment and survival in adult recipients of umbilical-cord blood from unrelated donors". N. Engl. J. Med. 344 (24): 1815–22. PMID 11407342.
  4. Hale G, Waldmann H (1994). "Control of graft-versus-host disease and graft rejection by T cell depletion of donor and recipient with Campath-1 antibodies. Results of matched sibling transplants for malignant diseases". Bone Marrow Transplant. 13 (5): 597–611. PMID 8054913.
  5. Lancet 2005 Aug 27-Sep 2;366(9487):733-41

Template:WS Template:WH