Health-Related Quality of Life among Older Related Hematopoietic Stem Cell Donors (>60 Years) Is Equivalent to That of Younger Related Donors (18 to 60 Years): A Related Donor Safety Study

Comparison of Older Related versus Younger Unrelated Donors for Older Recipients of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation with Acute Myeloid Leukemia or Myelodysplastic Syndrome: A Large Single-Center Analysis

For patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT), HLA-matched related donors (MRDs) have traditionally been the preferred donor source. However, as the age of recipients increases, their sibling donors are aging as well. In this study, we investigated whether younger matched unrelated donors (MUDs) might be a better donor source than similarly aged sibling donors for patients age >60 years with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). A total of 499 patients age 60 to 70 years with AML or MDS who underwent alloHCT from an older MRD (donor age ≥50 years) or a younger MUD (donor age ≤35 years) between 2010 and 2022 were evaluated. Of these, 360 patients (72%) received an MUD graft and 139 (28%) received an MRD graft. The median recipient age was 64 years in the MRD group and 66 years in the MUD group. With a median follow-up among survivors of 53 months (range, 9 to 147 months ), the 4-year progression-free survival was 40% in the MRD group and 41% in the MUD group (P = .79) and the 4-year overall survival was 50% and 44%, respectively (P = .15), with no between-group differences in nonrelapse mortality, relapse, and acute or chronic graft-versus-host disease. In the MUD group, we also compared the effect of donor age 18 to 24 years and donor age 25 to 35 years and found no differences in outcomes between the groups. We conclude that outcomes are comparable between the use of older MRDs and use of younger MUDs for elderly patients with AML or MDS, that there is no donor age effect among younger MUDs, and that the use of either donor type is reasonable.

Severe short-term adverse events in related bone marrow or peripheral blood stem cell donors

The incidence of severe adverse events (SAEs) and associated risk factors in hematopoietic cell transplantation donors needs to be clarified for related donors (relatives of the transplant recipient), whose criteria for donation are more lenient than for unrelated donors. Data from related donors registered in the Japanese national data registry database between 2005 and 2021 were evaluated to determine the association of short-term SAE incidence with donor characteristics at registration.Fourteen of 4339 bone marrow (BM) donors (0.32%) and 54 of 10,684 peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) donors (0.51%) experienced confirmed SAEs during the short donation period. No deaths were observed. Past medical history was a common risk factor for SAEs in both BM and PBSC donors. Age of 60 years or older and female sex were identified as risk factors for SAEs in PBSC donors. Female sex was also a risk factor for poor mobilization, which resulted in discontinuation of PBSC collection.Although donors should be selected carefully, a certain level of safety is ensured for related donors in Japan. Donor safety should be further increased by improving the selection method for related donors and extending the follow-up period.

Suitability of haematopoietic cell donors: updated consensus recommendations from the WBMT standing committee on donor issues

The contribution of related donors to the globally rising number of allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantations (HSCT) remains increasingly important, particularly because of the growing use of haploidentical HSCT. Compared with the strict recommendations on the suitability for unrelated donors, criteria for related donors allow for more discretion and vary between centres. In 2015, the donor outcome committee of the Worldwide Network for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (WBMT) proposed consensus recommendations of suitability criteria for paediatric and adult related donors. This Review provides updates and additions to these recommendations from a panel of experts with global representation, including the WBMT, the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation donor outcome committee, the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research donor health and safety committee, the US National Marrow Donor Program, and the World Marrow Donor Association, after review of the current literature and guidelines. Sections on the suitability of related donors who would not qualify as unrelated donors have been updated. Sections on communicable diseases, clonal haematopoiesis of indeterminate potential, paediatric aspects including psychological issues, and reporting on serious adverse events have been added. The intention of this Review is to support decision making, with the goal of minimising the medical risk to the donor and protecting the recipient from transmissible diseases.

Basic characteristics and safety of donation in related and unrelated haematopoietic progenitor cell donors - first 10 years of prospective donor follow-up of Swiss donors

Since July 2007 prospective life-long follow-up (FU) for unrelated (URD) and related donors (RD) is mandatory in Switzerland and data on every allogeneic haematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) donation are collected prospectively. We report the real-world experience of HPC donation during a 10-year study period (01.07.2007-30.06.2017) with basic characteristics and FU data. 1105 donors underwent 1155 HPC donation procedures. Eighty percent of first donations performed by 802 (73%) RDs and 303 (27%) URDs were peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC), 20% bone marrow (BM). Male donors were over-represented as URD (60% male vs 40% female). Main differences between RDs and URDs concerned age and pre-existing health disorders. RDs were significantly older at first donation (median age 48 years) compared to URD (34 years, p < 0.0001) and had more pre-existing health problems: 25% vs 9% in URD (p < 0.0001). No fatal complications occurred, collection related severe adverse events (SAE) after first donation were not significantly different between groups (RD 1.2%, URD 0.99%), incidence rates for neoplastic and autoimmune diseases did not exceed the rates of the general population. RDs are a more heterogeneous and potentially more vulnerable group, but if donor evaluation is performed appropriately, HPC donation is still safe.

Health-Related Quality-of-Life Comparison of Adult Related and Unrelated HSC Donors: An RDSafe Study

Multiple investigations have documented the health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) and donation-related experiences of unrelated donors (URDs), but similar investigations of the related donor (RD) experience have been less common. The central goal of this study was to longitudinally examine and compare HRQoL of RD and URD hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) donors from predonation through 1 year postdonation. This prospective investigation included adult HSC donors ages 18 to 60 years who donated bone marrow or peripheral blood stem cells at one of 48 geographically diverse US transplant/donor centers and completed HRQoL interviews at predonation and 4 weeks and 1 year postdonation. At predonation, related donors were less ambivalent about donation (t = -3.30; P = .001), more satisfied with their decision to donate (t = 2.65; P = .009), and more likely to define themselves as donors (t = 2.94; P = .004) than were URDs. However, related donors were more concerned about the use of needles (odds ratio [OR] = 2.19; P = .012), about who would pay for the procedure (OR = 2.80; P = .011), and the possibility that they would feel responsible if the transplant failed (t = 2.31; P = .022). Shortly postdonation, related donors were more likely to report donation-related pain (t = 2.50; P = .013) and lightheadedness (OR = 3.63; P = .028). At 1 year postdonation, related donors were less likely to be fully recovered from donation (OR = 0.10; P = .010) and more likely to report a longer recovery period following donation (t = 2.57; P = .011), although this latter finding was primarily due to the percentage of related versus unrelated donors not fully recovered at 1 year postdonation (10% versus 1%). Taken together, these findings suggest that current related donor management practices may be sufficient in preparing related donors for the psychological aspects of donation but that there may be more to do in terms of calibrating the description of donation-related experiences and recovery time to the related donor group (i.e., descriptions of donation experiences based on unrelated donation may not provide best estimates of experience for this group).

Plerixafor alone for the mobilization and transplantation of HLA-matched sibling donor hematopoietic stem cells

Plerixafor, a direct antagonist of CXCR4/stromal-derived factor 1, can safely and rapidly mobilize allografts without the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). We conducted a phase 2, multicenter, prospective study of plerixafor-mobilized HLA-identical sibling allografts for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in recipients with hematological malignancies. Donors (n = 64) were treated with subcutaneous plerixafor (240 µg/kg) and started leukapheresis (LP) 4 hours later. The primary objective was to determine the proportion of donors who were successfully mobilized: defined as collection of ≥2.0 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells per kilogram recipient weight in ≤2 LP sessions. Recipients subsequently received reduced intensity (RIC; n = 33) or myeloablative (MAC; n = 30) conditioning. Sixty-three of 64 (98%) donors achieved the primary objective. The median CD34⁺ cell dose per kilogram recipient weight collected within 2 days was 4.7 (0.9-9.6). Plerixafor was well tolerated with only grade 1 or 2 drug-related adverse events noted. Bone pain was not observed. Plerixafor-mobilized grafts engrafted promptly. One-year progression-free and overall survivals were 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36% to 71%) and 63% (95% CI, 46% to 79%) for MAC and 64% (95% CI, 47% to 79%) and 70% (95% CI, 53% to 84%) for RIC recipients, respectively. Donor toxicity was reduced relative to G-CSF mobilized related donors. This is the first multicenter trial to demonstrate that, as an alternative to G-CSF, plerixafor rapidly and safely mobilizes sufficient numbers of CD34⁺ cells from matched sibling donors for HCT. Engraftment was prompt, and outcomes in recipients were encouraging. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01696461.

Donor Evaluation for Hematopoietic Stem and Progenitor Cell Collection

With the increasing incidence of hematopoietic allogeneic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), the importance of securing a cellular product, safely from a donor, and ensuring that the product is without additional risk to the recipient, continues to be of paramount importance. The evaluation of the donor’s medical eligibility and suitability is designed to identify and limit the risk of transmitting infectious, genetic, or neoplastic diseases to the recipient through the product. It also aims to ensure a maximum level of safety for the donor and informs them of the risks of donation. Several regulatory agencies, national and international registries, and accreditation bodies have facilitated the availability and safe provision of human cells, tissues, and cellular- and tissue-based products not only at local institutions but also through international exchange.

[Related donors follow-up: Guidelines from the Francophone Society of Bone Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (SFGM-TC)]

Since 2010 there has been an exponential increase of the number of transplants performed from related donors. The development of haploidentical transplants increases the resort to related-donation, which presents two main advantages: a less important financial cost and a faster availability of the graft. Standards for mandatory accreditation exist, but the adherence to these recommendations is not optimal: currently, different practices regarding the organizational modalities of care, recruitment criteria, qualification and follow-up of related donors have been observed among French transplant centers. The Francophone Society of Marrow Transplant and Cellular Therapy (SFGM-TC) has developed guidelines for the consent and the non-eligibility criteria for hematopoietic stem cell donors. A multidisciplinary group has devised a booklet as a medium to inform donors about hematopoietic cell donation and transplantation in a clear and accessible language. This paper provides recommendations on post-donation follow-up, taking into account both medical standards and organizational constraints of French centers. Some tools are proposed.

Related peripheral blood stem cell donors experience more severe symptoms and less complete recovery at one year compared to unrelated donors

Unlike unrelated donor registries, transplant centers lack uniform approaches to related donor assessment and deferral. To test whether related donors are at increased risk for donation-related toxicities, we conducted a prospective observational trial of 11,942 related and unrelated donors aged 18-60 years. Bone marrow (BM) was collected at 37 transplant and 78 National Marrow Donor Program centers, and peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) were collected at 42 transplant and 87 unrelated donor centers in North America. Possible presence of medical comorbidities was verified prior to donation, and standardized pain and toxicity measures were assessed pre-donation, peri-donation, and one year following. Multivariate analyses showed similar experiences for BM collection in related and unrelated donors; however, related stem cell donors had increased risk of moderate [odds ratios (ORs) 1.42; P<0.001] and severe (OR 8.91; P<0.001) pain and toxicities (OR 1.84; P<0.001) with collection. Related stem cell donors were at increased risk of persistent toxicities (OR 1.56; P=0.021) and non-recovery from pain (OR 1.42; P=0.001) at one year. Related donors with more significant comorbidities were at especially high risk for grade 2-4 pain (OR 3.43; P<0.001) and non-recovery from toxicities (OR 3.71; P<0.001) at one year. Related donors with more significant comorbidities were at especially high risk for grade 2-4 pain (OR 3.43; P<0.001) and non-recovery from toxicities (OR 3.71; P<0.001) at one year. Related donors reporting grade ≥2 pain had significant decreases in Health-Related Quality of Life (HR-QoL) scores at one month and one year post donation (P=0.004). In conclusion, related PBSC donors with comorbidities are at increased risk for pain, toxicity, and non-recovery at one year after donation. Risk profiles described in this study should be used for donor education, planning studies to improve the related donor experience, and decisions regarding donor deferral. Registered at clinicaltrials.gov identifier:00948636.

Effect of Aging and Predonation Comorbidities on the Related Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Donor Experience: Report from the Related Donor Safety Study

The development of reduced-intensity approaches for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation has resulted in growing numbers of older related donors (RDs) of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs). The effects of age on donation efficacy, toxicity, and long-term recovery in RDs are poorly understood. To address this we analyzed hematologic variables, pain, donation-related symptoms, and recovery in 1211 PBSC RDs aged 18 to 79 enrolled in the Related Donor Safety Study. RDs aged > 60 had a lower median CD34+ level before apheresis compared with younger RDs (age > 60, 59 × 106/L; age 41 to 60, 81 × 106/L; age 18 to 40, 121 × 106/L; P < .001). This resulted in older donors undergoing more apheresis procedures (49% versus 30% ≥ 2 collections, P < .001) and higher collection volumes (52% versus 32% > 24 L, P < .001), leading to high percentages of donors aged > 60 with postcollection thrombocytopenia <50 × 109/L (26% and 57% after 2 and 3days of collection, respectively). RDs aged 18 to 40 had a higher risk of grades 2 to 4 pain and symptoms pericollection, but donors over age 40 had more persistent pain at 1, 6, and 12 months (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; P = 0.02) and a higher rate of nonrecovery to predonation levels (OR, 1.7; P = .01). Donors reporting comorbidities increased significantly with age, and those with comorbidities that would have led to deferral by National Marrow Donor Program unrelated donor standards had an increased risk for persistent grades 2 to 4 pain (OR, 2.41; P < .001) and failure to recover to predonation baseline for other symptoms (OR, 2.34; P = .004). This information should be used in counseling RDs regarding risk and can assist in developing practice approaches aimed at improving the RD experience for high-risk individuals.

Adult-related haematopoietic stem cell donor experiences and the provision of information and psychosocial support: A systematic literature review

For blood cancer patients, haematopoietic stem cells (HSC) donated by a relative can be lifesaving. However, related donors can face significant physical and psychosocial challenges. As the demand for adult-related HSC donors is increasing, it is important to review our understanding of adult-related HSC donors' need for and availability of information and psychosocial support with a view to identifying gaps in the literature. A systematic review of relevant studies (2000-2017) was conducted using five databases with supplementary hand searching. Sixteen studies involving 1,024 related HSC donors met the following criteria: English or Dutch language, peer-reviewed, sampled first-time-related HSC donors, ≥18 years, haematological malignancies, assessed psychosocial aspects, retrospective or prospective and with or without comparison group. Data were abstracted, and study quality was assessed using the PRISMA criteria. Studies contained limited information on the provision of information and psychosocial support. Most studies addressed pre-donation information, and none reported providing information or support to donors post-donation. Additionally, few studies formally assessed unmet needs. Recommendations include improved transparency of reporting for the availability, sources and timing of information and psychosocial support, and the identification of unmet needs to enable the development of educational and psychosocial interventions for this invaluable donor population.