Search

Despite the use of 'high efficacy' disease-modifying therapies, disease activity and clinical progression of different immune-mediated neurological diseases continue for some patients, resulting in accumulating disability, deteriorating social and mental health, and high economic cost to patients and society. Although autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant is an effective treatment modality, it is an intensive chemotherapy-based therapy with a range of short- and long-term side-effects. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) has revolutionized the treatment of B-cell and other hematological malignancies, conferring long-term remission for otherwise refractory diseases. However, the toxicity of this treatment, particularly cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, and the complexity of production necessitate the need for a high level of specialization at treating centers. Early-phase trials of CAR-T therapies in immune-mediated B cell driven conditions, such as systemic lupus erythematosus, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and myasthenia gravis, have shown dramatic clinical response with few adverse events. Based on the common physiopathology, CAR-T therapy in other immune-mediated neurological disease, including multiple sclerosis, chronic inflammatory polyradiculopathy, autoimmune encephalitis, and stiff person syndrome, might be an effective option for patients, avoiding the need for long-term immunosuppressant medications. It may prove to be a more selective immunoablative approach than autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant, with potentially increased efficacy and lower adverse events. In this review, we present the state of the art and future directions of the use of CAR-T in such conditions. ANN NEUROL 2024., (© 2024 The Author(s). Annals of Neurology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Neurological Association.)

The objective of the study was the analysis of clinical types, outcomes, and risk factors associated with the outcome of adenovirus (ADV) infection, in children and adults after allo-HCT. A total number of 2529 patients (43.9% children; 56.1% adults) transplanted between 2000 and 2022 reported to the EBMT database with diagnosis of ADV infection were analyzed. ADV infection manifested mainly as viremia (62.6%) or gastrointestinal infection (17.9%). The risk of 1-year mortality was higher in adults (p = 0.0001), and in patients with ADV infection developing before day +100 (p < 0.0001). The 100-day overall survival after diagnosis of ADV infections was 79.2% in children and 71.9% in adults (p < 0.0001). Factors contributing to increased risk of death by day +100 in multivariate analysis, in children: CMV seropositivity of donor and/or recipient (p = 0.02), and Lansky/Karnofsky score <90 (p < 0.0001), while in adults: type of ADV infection (viremia or pneumonia vs gastrointestinal infection) (p = 0.0004), second or higher HCT (p = 0.0003), and shorter time from allo-HCT to ADV infection (p = 0.003). In conclusion, we have shown that in patients infected with ADV, short-term survival is better in children than adults. Factors directly related to ADV infection (time, clinical type) contribute to mortality in adults, while pre-transplant factors (CMV serostatus, Lansky/Karnofsky score) contribute to mortality in children., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Cell and gene therapy poses evolving challenges. The current article summarizes the discussions held by European Regional Committee of the International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy and the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) on the current challenges in this field, focusing on the European setting. This article emphasizes the imperative assessment of real-world cell and gene therapy activity, advocating for expanded registries beyond hematopoietic transplantation and chimeric antigen receptor-T-cell therapy. Accreditation's role in ensuring standardized procedures, as exemplified by JACIE (The Joint Accreditation Committee of ISCT-Europe and EBMT), is crucial for safety. Access to commercial products and reimbursement variations among countries underscore the need for uniform access to advanced therapy medical products (ATMPs). Academic product development and point-of-care manufacturing face barriers to patient access. Hospital Exemption's potential, demonstrated by some initial experiences, may increase patient accessibility in individual situations. Regulatory challenges, including the ongoing European ATMPs legislation review, necessitate standardized criteria for Hospital Exemption and mandatory reporting within registries. Efforts to combat unproven therapies and fraud involve collaboration between scientific societies, regulatory bodies and patient groups. Finally, is important to highlight the vital role of education and workforce development in meeting the escalating demand for specialized professionals in the ATMP field. Collaboration among scientific societies, academic institutions, industry, regulatory bodies and patient groups is crucial for overcoming all these challenges to increase gene and cell therapy activity in Europe., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest FSG, JV, DF, JJZ and MG are members of the International Society for Cellular Therapy (ISCT-EU) Executive Committee. AR, CC, SC, HD, NG, CH, JHEK, BN, TR, ISG, JAS and AS are members of European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) executive committee or working groups representatives. FSG has received research support from Novartis, Gilead. Honoraria from Novartis, Gilead, Pfizer, BMS-Celgene and Pierre-Fabré. CC has received honoraria (personal and institutional) and travel support from Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, BMS, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Kite / Gilead, Novartis and Sanofi SA as a compensation for speaker's bureau and advisory boards. JK was shareholder of Gadeta and is inventor on multiple patents dealing with engineered immune cells, and has received research support from Novartis, Milteny Biotech and Gadeta. JAS has received consultancy honoraria from Kiadis, Medac, Vertex and Jazz. AS has received research support from Takeda and honoraria from Takeda, BMS/Celgene, MSD, Novartis, Gilead Kite, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, Janssen and Jazz Pharmaceuticals. All other authors have no commercial, proprietary or financial interest in the products or companies described in this article., (Copyright © 2024 International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We aimed to compare outcomes following treosulfan (TREO) or busulfan (BU) conditioning in a large cohort of myelofibrosis (MF) patients from the EBMT registry. A total of 530 patients were included; 73 received TREO and 457 BU (BU ≤ 6.4 mg/kg in 134, considered RIC, BU > 6.4 mg/kg in 323 considered higher dose (HD)). Groups were compared using adjusted Cox models. Cumulative incidences of engraftment and acute GVHD were similar across the 3 groups. The TREO group had significantly better OS than BU-HD (HR:0.61, 95% CI: 0.39-0.93) and a trend towards better OS over BU-RIC (HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.41-1.05). Moreover, the TREO cohort had a significantly better Progression-Free-Survival (PFS) than both the BU-HD (HR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.38-0.84) and BU-RIC (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.39-0.91) cohorts, which had similar PFS estimates. Non-relapse mortality (NRM) was reduced in the TREO and BU-RIC cohorts (HR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.24-0.80 TREO vs BU-HD; HR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.28-1.04 TREO vs BU-RIC). Of note, relapse risk did not significantly differ across the three groups. In summary, within the limits of a registry-based study, TREO conditioning may improve PFS in MF HSCT and have lower NRM than BU-HD with a similar relapse risk to BU-RIC. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Over the last 15 years activity of diagnostic flow cytometry services have evolved from monitoring of CD4 T cell subsets in HIV-1 infection to screening for primary and secondary immune deficiencies syndromes and assessment of immune constitution following B cell depleting therapy and transplantation. Changes in laboratory activity in high income countries have been driven by initiation of anti-retroviral therapy (ART) in HIV-1 regardless of CD4 T cell counts, increasing recognition of primary immune deficiency syndromes and the wider application of B cell depleting therapy and transplantation in clinical practice. Laboratories should use their experience in standardization and quality assurance of CD4 T cell counting in HIV-1 infection to provide immune monitoring services to patients with primary and secondary immune deficiencies. Assessment of immune reconstitution post B cell depleting agents and transplantation can also draw on the expertise acquired by flow cytometry laboratories for detection of CD34 stem cell and assessment of MRD in hematological malignancies. This guideline provides recommendations for clinical laboratories on providing flow cytometry services in screening for immune deficiencies and its emerging role immune reconstitution after B cell targeting therapies and transplantation., (© 2024 The Author(s). Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Clinical Cytometry Society.)

The EBMT (European Blood and Marrow Transplantation Society) aims to connect patients, the scientific community, and other stakeholders to improve hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and cellular therapy outcomes. We performed a cross-sectional online survey to understand the perceptions regarding Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient Active Involvement in Research (PAIR) in over 800 stakeholders (n = 813). Patients (n = 278) and health care professionals (HCPs) (n = 351) were compared. We observed high openness for EBMT PRO collection (n = 680, 84.5% across stakeholders' groups; patients n = 256, 93.1% versus HCPs n = 273, 78.4% [p < 0.001]) and PAIR (n = 702, 87.3% across stakeholder groups; patients n = 256, 92.4% versus HCPs n = 296, 85.8% [p = 0.009]), with a significantly higher proportion of patients expressing interest compared to HCPs. Priority domains for PROs data-collection identified were the assessment of symptom experience, psychosocial and cognitive functioning. The most important issues for patients specifically were the data-collection of PROs reflecting cognitive function, the option of reporting data at home, the importance of identifying actionable targets to improve their recovery, and receiving feedback on their input when participating in research projects. Our multistakeholder approach suggests an added value to embracing patient engagement in the development of meaningful research and service design within the transplantation and cellular therapy community., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Background: The humoral and T-cell responses to booster COVID-19 vaccine types in multidisease immunocompromised individuals who do not generate adequate antibody responses to two COVID-19 vaccine doses, is not fully understood. The OCTAVE DUO trial aimed to determine the value of third vaccinations in a wide range of patients with primary and secondary immunodeficiencies., Methods: OCTAVE-DUO was a prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial investigating humoral and T-cell responses in patients who are immunocompromised following a third vaccine dose with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, and of NVX-CoV2373 for those with lymphoid malignancies. We recruited patients who were immunocompromised from 11 UK hospitals, aged at least 18 years, with previous sub-optimal responses to two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 (1:1:1 for those with lymphoid malignancies), stratified by disease, previous vaccination type, and anti-spike antibody response following two doses. Individuals with lived experience of immune susceptibility were involved in the study design and implementation. The primary outcome was vaccine-specific immunity defined by anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies (Roche Diagnostics UK and Ireland, Burgess Hill, UK) and T-cell responses (Oxford Immunotec, Abingdon, UK) before and 21 days after the third vaccine dose analysed by a modified intention-to-treat analysis. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN 15354495, and the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT 2021-003632-87, and is complete., Findings: Between Aug 4, 2021 and Mar 31, 2022, 804 participants across nine disease cohorts were randomly assigned to receive BNT162b2 (n=377), mRNA-1273 (n=374), or NVX-CoV2373 (n=53). 356 (45%) of 789 participants were women, 433 (55%) were men, and 659 (85%) of 775 were White. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies measured 21 days after the third vaccine dose were significantly higher than baseline pre-third dose titres in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (median 1384 arbitrary units [AU]/mL [IQR 4·3-7990·0] compared with median 11·5 AU/mL [0·4-63·1]; p<0·001). Of participants who were baseline low responders, 380 (90%) of 423 increased their antibody concentrations to more than 400 AU/mL. Conversely, 166 (54%) of 308 baseline non-responders had no response after the third dose. Detectable T-cell responses following the third vaccine dose were seen in 494 (80%) of 616 participants. There were 24 serious adverse events (BNT612b2 eight [33%] of 24, mRNA-1273 12 [50%], NVX-CoV2373 four [17%]), two (8%) of which were categorised as vaccine-related. There were seven deaths (1%) during the trial, none of which were vaccine-related., Interpretation: A third vaccine dose improved the serological and T-cell response in the majority of patients who are immunocompromised. Individuals with chronic renal disease, lymphoid malignancy, on B-cell targeted therapies, or with no serological response after two vaccine doses are at higher risk of poor response to a third vaccine dose., Funding: Medical Research Council, Blood Cancer UK., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests DR reports research funding from Roche, Biotheranostics, RNA diagnostics, and Celgene; and honoraria or consultancy fees from Novartis, Pfizer, Lily, Roche, and AstraZeneca–Diiachi Sankyo. EB reports research funding from Vaccitech; consultancy fees from Roche, Vaccitech, and AstraZeneca; and holds patents in ChAdOx1 hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus vaccines. HP reports honoraria from AstraZeneca. IBM reports research funding or consultancy fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Causeway Therapeutics Cabaletta, Eli Lilly, Evelo Biosciences, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Regeneron, and UCB; consultancy fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Causeway Therapeutics Cabaletta, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Regeneron, and UCB; and is on the board of directors of Evelo Biosciences. KO reports royalties to his institution from Telix Pharmaceuticals for Radiolabelled anti-CD66 antibody; consulting fees from Sanofi and Takeda; and stocks in GSK. KLY reports honoraria from Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda, and Amgen; support for meeting attendance from Takeda; and participation on a trial steering committee for Sanofi and an advisory board for Janssen. MJA reports research funding from Pfizer. MW reports research funding from Oxford Immunotech. MBCK reports honoraria from Gilead. MC reports consultancy fees from VacciTech. PK reports research funding from Bayer; and consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Merck, and BMS. SM reports stock options in TCB BioPharm. SHL reports honoraria from AstraZeneca. SS reports research funding from Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim, BMS, GSK, Janssen, and UCB; and consultancy fees or honoraria from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, and UCB. SOB reports research funding from CSL Behring; and consultancy fees, honoraria, or support for attending meetings from GSK, Baxalta US, and Biotest. JAS reports honoraria from Novartis and Gilead; advisory board fees from the Kiadis clinical trial, Medac, and NHS England National Specialised Commissioning Clinical Reference Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation; and unpaid roles as President of British Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, secretary of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and as a board member of the British Society of Haematology. SJD is a Scientific Advisor to the Scottish Parliament on COVID-19 for which she receives a fee. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

In 2022, 46,143 HCT (19,011 (41.2%) allogeneic and 27,132 (58.8%) autologous) in 41,854 patients were reported by 689 European centers. 4329 patients received advanced cellular therapies, 3205 of which were CAR-T. An additional 2854 patients received DLI. Changes compared to the previous year were an increase in CAR-T treatments (+27%) and decrease in allogeneic (-4.0%) and autologous HCT (-1.7%). Main indications for allogeneic HCT were myeloid malignancies (10,433; 58.4%), lymphoid malignancies (4,674; 26.2%) and non-malignant disorders (2572; 14.4%). Main indications for autologous HCT were lymphomas (7897; 32.9%), PCD (13,694; 57.1%) and solid tumors (1593; 6.6%). In allogeneic HCT, use of sibling donors decreased by -7.7%, haploidentical donors by -6.3% and unrelated donors by -0.9%. Overall cord blood HCT decreased by -16.0%. Use of allogeneic, and to a lesser degree autologous HCT, decreased for lymphoid malignancies likely reflecting availability of new treatment modalities, including small molecules, bispecific antibodies, and CAR-T cells. Pediatric HCT activity remains stable (+0.3%) with differences between allogeneic and autologous HCT. Use of CAR-T continues to increase and reached a cumulative total of 9039 patients treated with wide differences across European countries. After many years of continuous growth, increase in application of HCT seems to have slowed down., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Over the last 3 decades, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has been successfully used to treat severe and refractory autoimmune diseases (AIDs). A multidisciplinary appraisal of potential benefits and risks by disease and transplant specialists is essential to determine individual suitability for HSCT., Objective: Our aim was to observe that patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health-related quality of life instruments can capture the unique patient perspective on disease burden and impact of treatment., Methods: Herein, we describe the basis and complexity of end points measuring patient-reported perceptions of efficacy and tolerability used in clinical practice and trials for patients with AIDs undergoing autologous HSCT., Results: PRO measures and patient-reported experience measures are key tools to evaluate the impact and extent of disease burden for patients affected by AIDs. For formal scientific assessment, it is essential that validated general instruments are used, whereas adaptations have resulted in disease-specific instruments that may help guide tailored interventions. An additional approach relates to qualitative evaluations, from carefully structured qualitative research to informal narratives, as patient stories. The patients' subjectively reported responses to HSCT may be influenced by their preprocedure expectations and investment in the HSCT journey., Conclusions: The complexity of AIDs advocates for individualized and multidisciplinary approach to positively affect the patient journey. PROs and health-related quality of life need to be collected using validated instruments in clinical practice and trials to enable robustness of data and to ensure the impact of the intervention is comprehensively assessed, addressing the main questions and needs of the involved stakeholders., Competing Interests: This work was led and supported by the Autoimmune Diseases Working Party, Nurses Group, and Patient Advocacy Committee of the EBMT. The EBMT provided resources via the working party, data office, and registry. Other than EBMT support, there is no funding body supporting this work, commercial or otherwise. Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no relevant conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

In MDS patients higher IPSS-R at transplant is associated with worse transplant outcome. Thus, it may seem beneficial to improve IPSS-R by therapeutic intervention prior to transplantation in order to "down-stage" the disease risk. However, there is no evidence to date to support this approach. A retrospective analysis of the EBMT transplant registry was performed to investigate the role of therapeutic interventions prior to transplantation with regard to changes in IPSS-R and transplant outcomes. A total of 1482 MDS patients with sufficient data to calculate IPSS-R at diagnosis and at time of transplantation were selected and analysed for transplant outcome in a multivariable Cox model including IPSS-R at diagnosis, treatment intervention, change in IPSS-R before transplant and several patient and transplant variables. Transplant outcome was unaffected by IPSS-R change in untreated patients and moderately superior in chemotherapy-treated patients with improved IPSS-R at transplant. Improved IPSS-R after hypomethylating agents (HMA) or other therapies showed no beneficial effect. However, when IPSS-R progressed after chemotherapy, (HMA) or other therapies, transplant outcome was worse than without any prior treatment. Similar results were found when reduction or increase in bone marrow (BM) blasts between diagnosis and transplantation was considered. The results show a limited benefit of IPSS-R down staging or reduction of BM blasts after chemotherapy and no benefit for HMA or other treatments and thus question the role of prior therapy in MDS patients scheduled for transplantation. The model-based survival estimates should help inform decision making for both doctors and patients., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Hematology.)

Promoting access to and excellence in hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) by collecting and disseminating data on global HCT activities is one of the principal activities of the Worldwide Network for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, a non-Governmental organization in working relations with the World Health Organization. HCT activities are recorded annually by member societies, national registries and individual centers including indication, donor type (allogeneic/autologous), donor match and stem cell source (bone marrow/peripheral blood stem cells/cord blood). In 2018, 1,768 HCT teams in 89 countries (six WHO regions) reported 93,105 (48,680 autologous and 44,425 allogeneic) HCT. Major indications were plasma cell disorders and lymphoma for autologous, and acute leukemias and MDS/MPN for allogeneic HCT. HCT number increased from 48,709 in 2007. Notable increases were seen for autoimmune diseases in autologous and hemoglobinopathies in allogeneic HCT. The number of allogeneic HCT more than doubled with significant changes in donor match. While HCT from HLA identical siblings has seen only limited growth, HCT from non-identical related donors showed significant increase worldwide. Strongest correlation between economic growth indicator of gross national income/capita and HCT activity/ten million population was observed for autologous HCT (r=0.79). HCT from unrelated donors showed strong correlation (r=0.68), but only moderate correlation (r=0.51) was detected from related donors. The use of HCT doubled in about a decade worldwide at different speed and with significant changes regarding donor match as a sign of improved access to HCT worldwide. Although narrowing, significant gaps remain between developing and non-developing countries.

Background: Nutritional prehabilitation may improve haematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) outcomes, although little evidence exists. The present study aimed to understand healthcare professional (HCP) perceptions of prehabilitation and nutritional care pre-HCT in UK centres., Methods: An anonymous online survey (developed and refined via content experts and piloting) was administered via email to multidisciplinary HCPs in 39 UK adult centres, between July 2021 and June 2022. Data are presented as proportions of responses. Routine provision denotes that care was provided >70% of time., Results: Seventy-seven percent (n = 66) of HCPs, representing 61.5% (n = 24) of UK adult HCT centres, responded. All HCPs supported prehabilitation, proposing feasible implementation between induction chemotherapy (60.4%; n = 40) and first HCT clinic (83.3%; n = 55). Only 12.5% (n = 3) of centres had a dedicated prehabilitation service. Nutrition (87.9%; n = 58), emotional wellbeing (92.4%; n = 61) and exercise (81.8%; n = 54) were considered very important constituents. HCPs within half of the HCT centres (n = 12 centres) reported routine use of nutrition screening pre-HCT with a validated tool; 66.7% of HCPs (n = 36) reported using the malnutrition universal screening tool (MUST). Sixty-two percent (n = 41) of HCPs reported those at risk, received nutritional assessments, predominantly by dietitians (91.6%; n = 22) using the dietetic care process (58.3%; n = 14). Body mass index (BMI) was the most frequently reported body composition measure used by HCPs (70.2%, n = 33). Of 59 respondents, non-dietitians most routinely provided dietary advice pre-HCT (82.4%; n = 28 vs. 68%; n = 17, p = 0.2); including high-energy/protein/fat and neutropenic diet advice. Prophylactic enteral feeding pre-HCT was rare, indicated by low BMI and significant unintentional weight loss. Just under half (n = 25 of 59, 42.4%) HCPs reported exercise advice was given routinely pre-HCT., Conclusions: Nutrition and prehabilitation pre-HCT are considered important and deliverable by HCPs, but current provision in UK centres is limited and inconsistent., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Dietetic Association.)

Background: A previous controlled trial of autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with refractory Crohn's disease did not meet its primary endpoint and reported high toxicity. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of HSCT with an immune-ablative regimen of reduced intensity versus standard of care in this patient population., Methods: This open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial was conducted in nine National Health Service hospital trusts across the UK. Adults (aged 18-60 years) with active Crohn's disease on endoscopy (Simplified Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease [SES-CD] ulcer sub-score of ≥2) refractory to two or more classes of biological therapy, with no perianal or intra-abdominal sepsis or clinically significant comorbidity, were recruited. Participants were centrally randomly assigned (2:1) to either HSCT with a reduced dose of cyclophosphamide (intervention group) or standard care (control group). Randomisation was stratified by trial site by use of random permuted blocks of size 3 and 6. Patients in the intervention group underwent stem-cell mobilisation (cyclophosphamide 1 g/m 2 with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 5 μg/kg) and stem-cell harvest (minimum 2·0 × 10 6 CD34 + cells per kg), before conditioning (fludarabine 125 mg/m 2 , cyclophosphamide 120 mg/kg, and rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin [thymoglobulin] 7·5 mg/kg in total) and subsequent stem-cell reinfusion supported by G-CSF. Patients in the control group continued any available conventional, biological, or nutritional therapy. The primary outcome was absence of endoscopic ulceration (SES-CD ulcer sub-score of 0) without surgery or death at week 48, analysed in the intention-to-treat population by central reading. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 17160440., Findings: Between Oct 18, 2018, and Nov 8, 2019, 49 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 23 (47%) were randomly assigned: 13 (57%) to the intervention group and ten (43%) to the control group. In the intervention group, ten (77%) participants underwent HSCT and nine (69%) reached 48-week follow-up; in the control group, nine (90%) reached 48-week follow-up. The trial was halted in response to nine reported suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions in six (46%) patients in the intervention group, including renal failure due to proven thrombotic microangiopathy in three participants and one death due to pulmonary veno-occlusive disease. At week 48, absence of endoscopic ulceration without surgery or death was reported in three (43%) of seven participants in the intervention group and in none of six participants in the control group with available data. Serious adverse events were more frequent in the intervention group (38 in 13 [100%] patients) than in the control group (16 in four [40%] patients). A second patient in the intervention group died after week 48 of respiratory and renal failure., Interpretation: Although HSCT with an immune-ablative regimen of reduced intensity decreased endoscopic disease activity, significant adverse events deem this regimen unsuitable for future clinical use in patients with refractory Crohn's disease., Funding: Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JOL reports grants for investigator-initiated research from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation research grant for the current project, AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Takeda UK, and Shire; honoraria for consulting or advisory boards from AbbVie, Allergan, Atlantic Healthcare, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Lilly, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Galapagos NV, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, MSD, Napp Pharmaceuticals, Norgine BV, Pfizer, Shire, Takeda UK, and Vifor Pharma Management; honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Galapagos NV, Janssen, Norgine BV, Pfizer, Shire, Takeda UK, and Cornerstone Healthcare Group; and support for attending meetings, travel, or both from AbbVie, Takeda UK, MSD, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, and Janssen, outside the submitted work. DH reports part funding for salary through the NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation research grant for this project. RE reports participation in the NIHR Clinical Trials Unit Standing Advisory Committee (2020 to present), and the Health Technology Assessment Clinical Evaluation and Trials Committee (2017–21). LD reports various NIHR grants, none of which relate to Crohn's disease or investigate treatments similar to those in ASTIClite. SD reports salary funding from NHS Research Scotland via NHS Lothian to support clinical trial work; grants from the Edinburgh & Lothian Health Foundations Award, the Pathological Society of Great Britain & Northern Ireland, Helmsley Charitable Trust–Gut Cell Atlas Normal and Crohn's Disease, and Helmsley Charitable Trust CDTREAT and BIOPIC studies; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Jannsen, Ferring, Takeda, and AbbVie; and support for attending meetings, travel, or both from Janssen, Dr Falk Symposium, and AbbVie. SD also reports participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie and MHRA; and leadership or fiduciary role on other board, society, committee, or advocacy groups for the British Society of Gastroenterology, the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, and the Scottish Government. JG reports consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, MorphoSys AG, and Novartis AG; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, and Janssen; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. PI reports grants or contracts from MSD, Takeda UK, Celltrion, and Pfizer; consulting fees from Bristol Meyers Squibb, AbbVie, Arena, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Celltrion, Genentech, Gilead, Hospira, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Prometheus, Roche, Sandoz, Samsung Bioepis, Takeda, Topivert, VH2, Vifor Pharma, and Warner Chilcott; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Dr Falk Pharma GmbH, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Galapagos NV, Gilead Sciences, MSD, Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda UK, Tillotts Pharma AG, Sapphire Medical, Sandoz, Shire, and Warner Chilcott UK, outside the submitted work. EL reports various other NIHR grants, none of which relate to Crohn's disease or investigate treatments similar to those in ASTIClite; and participation in two data monitoring and ethics committees and two trial steering committees for NIHR trials outside the submitted work, none of which relate to Crohn's disease. MP reports grants or contracts from Pfizer, Gilead Sciences, and Crohn's & Colitis UK, outside the submitted work; and a leadership role as Director of Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, outside the submitted work (2020 to present). AL reports consulting fees from Takeda UK, Vifor Pharma Management, Janssen, and PredictImmune; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda UK, Janssen, and Celltrion; support for attending meetings, travel, or both from Janssen, Tillotts Pharma AG, Takeda UK, and Vifor Pharma Management; and is Director of the non-executive IBD Registry Board. AGP reports being the Chief Executive Officer of multimmune GmbH, Chief Scientific Officer of Alphageneron Pharmaceuticals, and a member of the scientific advisory board of Cytomos, none of which relate to Crohn's disease and all are outside the submitted work. SS reports grants or contracts from Crohn's & Colitis UK and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda UK, Janssen, AbbVie, Celltrion, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, and Bristol Meyers Squibb, outside the submitted work; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Takeda UK, Janssen, AbbVie, Celltrion, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Bristol Meyers Squibb, and Vifor Pharma Management, outside the submitted work. JS reports grant funding for IBD research from the European Crohn's & Colitis Organization (ECCO), The Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust, Crohn's & Colitis UK, Crohn's & Colitis Foundation, Action Medical Research, the NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation, European Commission FP-7, and Horizon 2020 programmes, outside the submitted work; and payment or honoraria for a lecture for the Falk Foundation, and a leadership role on the UK IBD Registry Management Board. ST reports grants or contracts from ECCO, the Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Takeda UK, and the Norman Collisson Charitable Trust; and consulting fees from ai4gi Joint Venture, Allergan, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Bühlmann Laboratories AG, Celgene, ChemoCentryx, Cosmo Pharmaceuticals NV, Enterome, Equillium, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Genentech–Roche, Gilead Sciences, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Grünenthal, GlaxoSmithKline, Immunometabolism, Indigo Diabetes, Janssen, Lilly, Merck KGaA, Mestag Therapeutics, Novartis AG, Pfizer, PharmaVentures, Phesi, Satisfai Health, Sensyne Health, Sorriso, SynDermix, Synthon, Takeda UK, Topivert, UCB SA, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, VHsquared, and Vifor Pharma Management, outside the submitted work. ST also reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Dr Falk Pharma GmbH, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Pfizer, Shire, Takeda UK, and UCB SA; payment for expert testimony from Cosmo; support for attending meetings, travel, or both from AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Dr Falk Pharma GmbH, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Pfizer, Shire, Takeda UK, and UCB SA; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Amgen, outside the submitted work. SR reports research funding from MacroGenics and Kura Oncology, outside the submitted work. BU reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events for Gilead and Novartis; and support for attending meetings, travel, or both from Takeda and Gilead. JS reports support for the current work through a NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation grant; consulting fees from Medac (not directly related to Crohn's disease); and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Gilead Sciences, Vertex, and Actelion, none of which directly relate to Crohn's disease, outside the submitted work. JS also reports participation on the Kiadis Pharma trial Independent Data Monitoring Committee, which does not directly relate to Crohn's disease, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Androgens represent the historical therapeutic backbone of bone marrow failure (BMF) syndromes. However, their role has rarely been analyzed in a prospective setting, and systematic and long-term data regarding their usage, effectiveness and toxicity in both acquired and inherited BMF are currently unavailable. Here, taking advantage of a unique disease-specific international dataset, we retrospectively analyzed the largest cohort so far of BMF patients who received androgens before or in the absence of an allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), re-evaluating their current use in these disorders. We identified 274 patients across 82 European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) affiliated centers: 193 with acquired (median age 32 years) and 81 with inherited (median age 8 years) BMF. With a median duration of androgen treatment of 5.6 and 20 months, respectively, complete and partial remission rates at 3 months were 6% and 29% in acquired and 8% and 29% in inherited disorders. Five-year overall survival and failure-free survival (FFS) were respectively 63% and 23% in acquired and 78% and 14% in inherited BMF. Androgen initiation after second-line treatments for acquired BMF, and after >12 months post diagnosis for inherited BMF were identified as factors associated with improved FFS in multivariable analysis. Androgen use was associated with a manageable incidence of organ-specific toxicity, and low rates of solid and hematologic malignancies. Sub-analysis of transplant-related outcomes after exposure to these compounds showed probabilities of survival and complications similar to other transplanted BMF cohorts. This study delivers a unique opportunity to track androgen use in BMF syndromes and represents the basis for general recommendations on this category of therapeutics on behalf of the Severe Aplastic Anemia Working Party of the EBMT.

Autoimmune diseases (ADs) are characterized by loss of immune tolerance, high chronicity, with substantial morbidity and mortality, despite conventional immunosuppression (IS) or targeted disease modifying therapies (DMTs), which usually require repeated administration. Recently, novel cellular therapies (CT), including mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC), Chimeric Antigen Receptors T cells (CART) and regulatory T cells (Tregs), have been successfully adopted in ADs. An international expert panel of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the International Society for the Cell and Gene Therapy, reviewed all available evidence, based on the current literature and expert practices, on use of MSC, CART and Tregs, in AD patients with rheumatological, neurological, and gastroenterological indications. Expert-based consensus and recommendations for best practice and quality of patient care were developed to support clinicians, scientists, and their multidisciplinary teams, as well as patients and care providers and will be regularly updated., Competing Interests: RG discloses speaking honoraria from Biotest, Pfizer, Medac, Neovii and Magenta. TA received study support from Amgen, Janssen and honoraria from Neovii, GSK, Astra-Zeneca, Abbvie. FM received honoraria & travel support from BMS, Janssen, Gilead, Miltenyi, Novartis, Astra-Zeneca, Biontech, received research support from Gilead, and discloses advisory board from Biontech. JAS discloses consultancy for Vertex, Medac and Jazz, and advisory board from Kiadis. PA discloses study support by NIHR, payment for expert testimony by Pinsent Mason and Bugge Valentin and consulting to Cellerys AG. RS discloses speaking honoraria from Novartis and Gilead. CCL received travel support for attending meeting by Gilead and discloses consultancy for Nektar Therapeutics and Gilead. FSG received study support from Novartis and Gilead, speaking honoraria from Astra-Zeneca and travel support from Abbvie, Gilead and Pierre-Fabre. FO discloses speaking honoraria from Takeda, Medac, Kyowa Kirin, Menarini-Stemline, and travel support from Medac, Jazz and Janssen. JOL received study support from Abbvie, Gilead, Takeda, consultancy & honoraria from AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Celtrion, Engytix, Ferring, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Shire, Takeda, travel support by Abbvie, Takeda, Celltrion. AM received study support from Kyverna, Miltenyi and honoraria from Miltenyi, and participated to advisory board from Century Therapeutics. RC discloses speaking honoraria from GSK, AstraZeneca, Werfen, Rubió, Eli-Lilly, Pfizer. IYA discloses speaking honoraria from Kite, Novartis and BMS. None of the mentioned conflicts of interest were related to financing of the content of this manuscript. The remaining authors have nothing to declare., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Introduction: Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) is increasingly used as treatment for patients with active multiple sclerosis (MS), typically after failure of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). A recent phase III trial, 'Multiple Sclerosis International Stem Cell Transplant, MIST', showed that aHSCT resulted in prolonged time to disability progression compared with DMTs in patients with relapsing remitting MS (RRMS). However, the MIST trial did not include many of the current high-efficacy DMTs (alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab or cladribine) in use in the UK within the control arm, which are now offered to patients with rapidly evolving severe MS (RES-MS) who are treatment naïve. There remain, therefore, unanswered questions about the relative efficacy and safety of aHSCT over these high-efficacy DMTs in these patient groups. The StarMS trial (Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation versus Alemtuzumab, Ocrelizumab, Ofatumumab or Cladribine in Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis) will assess the efficacy, safety and long-term impact of aHSCT compared with high-efficacy DMTs in patients with highly active RRMS despite the use of standard DMTs or in patients with treatment naïve RES-MS., Methods and Analysis: StarMS is a multicentre parallel-group rater-blinded randomised controlled trial with two arms. A total of 198 participants will be recruited from 19 regional neurology secondary care centres in the UK. Participants will be randomly allocated to the aHSCT arm or DMT arm in a 1:1 ratio. Participants will remain in the study for 2 years with follow-up visits at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months postrandomisation. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who achieve 'no evidence of disease activity' during the 2-year postrandomisation follow-up period in an intention to treat analysis. Secondary outcomes include efficacy, safety, cost-effectiveness and immune reconstitution of aHSCT and the four high-efficacy DMTs., Ethics and Dissemination: The study was approved by the Yorkshire and Humber-Leeds West Research Ethics Committee (20/YH/0061). Participants will provide written informed consent prior to any study specific procedures. The study results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and abstracts will be submitted to relevant national and international conferences., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN88667898., Competing Interests: Competing interests: GB, JP, KEMD, RG, KH, DPap, ER, CB, MG, OC, CC, GG, MK, CK, RN, DPal, AP, NS, ES, TdS, AV, SW, BS report no relevant competing interests. AC reports no relevant disclosures since 2017. RH reports attendance at paid advisory boards with Novartis, Biogen and Roche. CAY reports personal compensation for serving on scientific advisory boards, conference support or speaker honoraria from BMS, Biogen, Celgene, Cytokinetics, GW Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Roche and Teva. Pharmaceuticals. PAM reports grants from National Institute of Health Research, non-financial support from National Institute of Health Research, grants from Benaroya Research Institute and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Jasper Therapeutics, personal fees from Magenta Therapeutics, personal fees from Rubius Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. JAS declares consultancy for Jazz, Medac, Vertex and Kiadis., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Conditioning protocols for patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) are being developed continuously to improve their anti-leukemic efficacy and reduce their toxicity. In this study, we compared the conditioning protocol of fludarabine with melphalan 140 mg/m 2 (FluMel) with conditioning protocols based on this same backbone but with an additional alkylating agent i.e., either fludarabine/BCNU (also known as carmustine)/melphalan (FBM), or fludarabine/thiotepa/melphalan (FTM) 110 mg/m 2 . We included 1272 adult patients (FluMel, n = 1002; FBM/FTM, n = 270) with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with intermediate/poor cytogenetic risk in first complete remission (CR) from the registry of the EBMT Acute Leukemia Working Party. Despite patients in the FBM/FTM group were older (64.1 years vs. 59.8 years, p < 0.001) and had a worse Karnofsky performance score (KPS < 90, 33% vs. 24%, p = 0.003), they showed a better overall survival (OS) (2 y OS: 68.3% vs. 58.1%, p = 0.02) and less non-relapse mortality (NRM) (2 y NRM: 15.8% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.009) compared to patients treated with FluMel. No significant differences were observed in relapse incidence (RI) (2 y RI: 24.9% vs. 23.7%, p = 0.62). In conclusion, the addition of a second alkylating agent (BCNU/carmustine or thiotepa) to FluMel as FBM/FTM conditioning, improves OS in AML patients in first CR with intermediate/poor risk cytogenetics after allo-HCT., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Hematological toxicity is the most common adverse event after chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Cytopenias can be profound and long-lasting and can predispose for severe infectious complications. In a recent worldwide survey, we demonstrated that there remains considerable heterogeneity in regard to current practice patterns. Here, we sought to build consensus on the grading and management of immune effector cell-associated hematotoxicity (ICAHT) after CAR T-cell therapy. For this purpose, a joint effort between the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) and the European Hematology Association (EHA) involved an international panel of 36 CAR T-cell experts who met in a series of virtual conferences, culminating in a 2-day meeting in Lille, France. On the basis of these deliberations, best practice recommendations were developed. For the grading of ICAHT, a classification system based on depth and duration of neutropenia was developed for early (day 0-30) and late (after day +30) cytopenia. Detailed recommendations on risk factors, available preinfusion scoring systems (eg, CAR-HEMATOTOX score), and diagnostic workup are provided. A further section focuses on identifying hemophagocytosis in the context of severe hematotoxicity. Finally, we review current evidence and provide consensus recommendations for the management of ICAHT, including growth factor support, anti-infectious prophylaxis, transfusions, autologous hematopoietic stem cell boost, and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. In conclusion, we propose ICAHT as a novel toxicity category after immune effector cell therapy, provide a framework for its grading, review literature on risk factors, and outline expert recommendations for the diagnostic workup and short- and long-term management., (© 2023 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is a high-risk procedure. Auditing and yearly outcome reviews help keep optimal quality of care and come with increased survival, but also has significant recurring costs. When data has been entered in a standardized registry, outcome analyses can be automated, which reduces work and increases standardization of performed analyses. To achieve this, we created the Yearly Outcome Review Tool (YORT), an offline, graphical tool that gets data from a single center EBMT registry export, allows the user to define filters and groups, and performs standardized analyses for overall survival, event-free survival, engraftment, relapse rate and non-relapse mortality, complications including acute and chronic Graft vs Host Disease (GvHD), and data completeness. YORT allows users to export data as analyzed to allow you to check data and perform manual analyses. We show the use of this tool on a two-year single-center pediatric cohort, demonstrating how the results for both overall and event-free survival and engraftment can be visualized. The current work demonstrates that using registry data, standardized tools can be made to analyze this data, which allows users to perform outcome reviews for local and accreditation purposes graphically with minimal effort, and help perform detailed standardized analyses. The tool is extensible to be able to accommodate future changes in outcome review and center-specific extensions., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Aims: Haematological malignancies represent a diverse group of diseases with complex diagnostic requirements. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Haematological Cancer: Improving Outcomes Guidance was published in 2003 and updated in 2016 (NG47), providing recommendations for service delivery including Specialist Integrated Haematological Malignancy Diagnostic Services (SIHMDSs). This survey assessed the implementation of NG47 guidelines, with a specific focus on implementation in relation to laboratory SIHMDS delivery., Methods: A survey was issued to the 17 SIHMDSs identified in England. The questionnaire covered laboratory configuration, information systems, integrated reporting and multidisciplinary team (MDT) working recommendations., Results: In the 10 responding SIHMDS, full implementation of recommendations was not achieved. Higher levels of implementation were reported in 'colocated' services compared with 'networked' SIHMDS. Increased guideline implementation was reported with longer duration since initial establishment of a SIHMDS and for laboratory based as opposed to clinical (MDT) reporting recommendations., Conclusions: Our survey highlights variable implementation of NICE guidance across SIHMDS, with likely inequity of access, standardisation and quality in haemato-oncology diagnostics. Provision of a more structured framework for guideline implementation could assist in increasing compliance to meet the goals of quality and equity of access to harmonised haemato-oncology diagnostics across the NHS in England. This would provide a basis for evaluating the clinical benefits and health economic impact of the SIHMDS model on patient care and outcomes., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JAS served as Clinical Lead for the 2016 Update of NICE Haematological Cancers: Improving Outcomes Guideline Committee (NG47)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)