Conventional allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is a potentially curative treatment option for various hematological diseases due, in part to high-dose conditioning and, in part, to graft-versus-tumor effects. Reduced-intensity or non-myeloablative conditioning regimens have relied mostly on graft-versus-tumor effects for disease control, and their advent has allowed relatively older and medically infirm patients to be offered allo-HCT. However, both HCT modalities have been associated with organ toxicities and graft-versus-host disease, resulting in substantial non-relapse mortality. It has become increasingly important to optimize pre-transplant risk assessment in order to improve HCT decision making and clinical trial assignments. Single-organ comorbidity involving liver, lung, heart, or kidney before HCT has been traditionally found to cause organ toxicity after HCT. Recent efforts have resulted in the advent of a weighted scoring system that could sensitively capture multiple-organ comorbidities prior to HCT. The HCT-comorbidity index (HCT-CI) has provided better prediction of HCT-related morbidity and mortality than other non-HCT-specific indices. Subsequent studies, with the exception of a few studies with modest numbers of patients, have confirmed the prognostic importance of the HCT-CI. Further, the HCT-CI has been consolidated with various disease-specific and patient-specific risk factors to refine assignments of patients to the appropriate HCT setting. Ongoing studies are addressing prospective validation of the HCT-CI, furthering our understanding of biological aging, and enhancing the applicability of the HCT-CI comorbidity coding. Future knowledge of the impacts of multiple comorbidities on post-HCT toxicities might guide new prophylactic and therapeutic interventions to lessen the procedure's mortality.

A balanced risk-benefit approach to hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is the key for maximized chances of cure with acceptable quality of life for patients with advanced hematologic malignancies. When considering efficacy, high-intensity conditioning regimens could eradicate the underlying malignancy that was previously refractory to all other conventional therapeutics. Infused allografts rescue patients from the lethal toxicity of conditioning regimens, but most importantly they serve as a lifelong consolidation treatment, via the power of graft-versus-tumor effects, preventing disease relapse. In the setting of non-myeloablative (NMA)-HCT, the donor immune system is relied on for both eradicating the underlying malignancy and preventing relapse. In addition, the new healthy grafts could act as a platform for better tolerance of maintenance immuno-chemotherapy after HCT.

In regard to safety, HCT can have four complex impacts on organ functions. First, conventional high-dose HCT preparative regimens have been known for causing serious toxicities to organs such as the gut, liver, kidney, heart, and lung. Organ toxicities can still be observed after reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) or NMA regimens.1,2  This is mainly because these regimens are almost exclusively offered to older and medically infirm patients who would have been ineligible for conventional HCT. Second, the myeloablation and/or immunosuppression caused by conditioning and post-grafting immunosuppressive treatments could set the stage for serious infections.3,4  Third, the donor T cells, and also to some extent B cells, are responsible for a series of acute and chronic graft-versus-host syndromes.5–7  Finally, total body irradiation, chemotherapy, post-grafting prophylactic and therapeutic immunosuppression, and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) could increase risks of long-term morbidity8,9  and secondary malignancy.10  All four impacts could result in increased mortality and impaired quality of life after HCT.

A roadmap for maximization of the benefits of HCT would require novel approaches for both improving tumor control and lessening morbidity and mortality after HCT. The latter is the main focus of this article, and it requires a better understanding of the biology and extents of interactions between HCT-associated interventions and patient-specific risk factors. This would allow for accurate pre-transplant benefit-risk assessment leading to assignments of patients to the most tolerable modality of HCT.

Chronological age has been long used as the main HCT prognostic variable, and arbitrary age cutoffs have been set up as exclusion criteria for high-dose conditioning regimens. However, age per se is a poor predictor of HCT outcomes,11  probably due to a lack of data on organ malfunctions in most previous reports. In addition, protocol exclusion criteria bias any assessment of the influence of aging, and recent reports failed to show any impacts of chronological age on allogeneic HCT (allo-HCT) outcomes.12–14  Biological aging is hypothetically composed of three parameters: age, physical function, and organ comorbidities. Indeed, among 427 cancer patients of whom over 50% had either leukemia or lymphoma, age, functional impairment, and comorbidities were found to independently predict patient survival regardless of the kind of cancer.15 

Among cancer patients, increasing comorbidities have been associated with offering no or less-than-ideal treatment, exclusion from clinical trials, increasing post-treatment toxicities and mortality, and impaired quality of life. These findings were confirmed in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma receiving conventional treatment.16  Statistically, comorbidities could either be confounders, limiting the internal validity, or effect modifiers, affecting the internal and external validity of studies.17 

It has become increasingly important to comprehensively study pre-HCT comorbidities and their impacts on HCT outcomes given the aforementioned results, as well as: 1) the aging of Western populations; 2) increasing numbers and severity of comorbidities among the older population18 ; 3) relatively high median age (65–70 years) at diagnosis of most hematologic malignancies19 ; 4) the advent of RIC/NMA regimens, which has increased the age cutoff for HCT to the eighth decade of life13,14 ; and 5) the need for weighted tools to better direct patients to the appropriate HCT conditioning regimen.20  This review discusses recent advances in understanding the roles of multiple comorbidities in the setting of HCT.

In the setting of HCT, adequate organ functions are patients' reserves to withstand the harshness of chemo-radiotherapy, to process different medications and large volumes of fluids, and to tolerate serious infections and the harmful effects of GVHD. Several investigators have studied correlations between pre-transplant organ malfunctions and post-HCT morbidity and mortality. Most if not all of the earlier studies have focused on single-organ malfunction, represented by laboratory findings, and its impact on the same organ toxicity after HCT.

Conflicting data have been reported on the prognostic importance of pre-transplant reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction. One study failed to demonstrate any impacts on severe post-HCT cardiac toxicities,21  another was limited by the rarity of post-HCT cardiac events,22  while in a third the impacts were limited to cardiac toxicities and no information on mortality was given.23  In contrast, abnormalities of pulmonary-function tests have been consistently found to affect HCT mortality. Low pre-transplant diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) was found to be associated with post-HCT death, but not due to respiratory failure,24  while low forced expiratory volume in 1-second (FEV1) was a risk factor for cytomegalovirus-associated interstitial pneumonitis.25  Recent studies have identified the two abnormalities to be the most uncorrelated pulmonary-function test variables,26  to predict mortality26,27  and decline in lung functions after HCT,28  and to differentiate between the insults of regimens with different intensities.29 

Abnormal liver (primarily elevated serum transaminases) and renal (primarily elevated serum creatinine) function tests have been studied for prediction of early mortality.27  Post-HCT sinusoidal obstruction syndrome and liver injury have been frequently seen among patients with pre-HCT elevated transaminase values or chronic hepatitis.30–32  Elevated pre-HCT serum creatinine was found to be a risk factor for post-HCT acute renal failure and mortality.27,33  Elevated serum creatinine could also be a limitation against efficient dosing of calcineurin inhibitors for the prevention of GVHD. Rare other reports have investigated the impacts of other single comorbidities. Depression, for example, was found to increase the risk of dying within 12 months after HCT by 3-fold.34  Still, there has been no known validated systematic method to integrate all these prognostic information into a decision-making algorithm for HCT. Further, as hinted earlier, most of the aforementioned studies on single-organ comorbidity did not correct for the impacts of other comorbidities.

It would be counterintuitive to think that single-organ comorbidity would affect morbidity and mortality after HCT in isolation from other ongoing organ malfunctions. However, until 2003,35  there was almost no effort made to evaluate the distribution of comorbidities among HCT recipients, to investigate how increasing numbers and/or severity of comorbidities affect HCT outcomes, or to include them in designing clinical trials. To better understand indications of NMA allo-HCT from unrelated donors, investigators from Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (FHCRC) carried out a study to assess clinical pre-transplant differences and compare toxicities, GVHD, and non-relapse mortality (NRM) between consecutive and concurrent NMA (n = 60) and myeloablative patients (n = 74). Investigators used the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) as a measure of comorbidities and as a novel parameter for pre-transplant clinical assessment. The CCI included 19 comorbidities that have been weighted on the basis of their strengths of associations with mortality among patients with general medical conditions.36  It is the most widely used comorbidity index in predicting mortality risks in various solid malignancies. The study results were presented at the ASH annual meeting,35  and were later published,1  showing that comorbidities, as scored by the CCI, were the only independent factor predicting grade IV non-hematologic toxicities at 100 days and 1 year after NRM. The CCI scores could be used to compare and stratify NMA and myeloablative patients into low- and high-risk groups for outcomes. The same investigators showed in a parallel study that the CCI was important in predicting NRM among related recipients,2  but with a weaker magnitude of association than in the unrelated study. Later, FHCRC investigators found that CCI scores of 0, 1, and ≥ 2 predicted 2-year NRM of 7%, 31%, and 46%, and overall survival of 78%, 49%, and 33%, respectively, among patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) treated with NMA allo-HCT.37 

Two other groups of investigators have started addressing the importance of comorbidity for HCT, and presented their data at the ASH annual meeting. Investigators from M.D. Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC)38  found among 51 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplasia (MDS) that age-adapted CCI39  scores of 0 to 2 predicted lessened NRM (0% vs. 18%; p = 0.02) and improved overall survival (73% vs. 53%; p = 0.04) compared with CCI scores of > 2. Pollyea et al. presented data showing the Kaplan-Feinstein Index to be a more sensitive indicator of comorbidity than the CCI among 81 patients given RIC allo-HCT.40  In a multivariate analysis, patient age and performance status were predictors for NRM, while comorbidity scores and performance status were predictors for survival.

The CCI was found to be of limited sensitivity in detecting comorbidities among HCT recipients, with only 12% of FHCRC myeloablative patients acquiring scores of ≥ 1.1  This was thought to be due to the fact that the CCI was not developed in the HCT setting, and therefore it lacked definitions of some common comorbidities such as infections, while it included crude definitions for others such as hepatic and pulmonary comorbidities. Clearly, lack of sensitivity would be a major limitation against using the CCI in clinical HCT protocols and studies.

To standardize and generalize the assessment of multiple comorbidities in the HCT setting, the FHCRC investigators modified the CCI to be better fitted for the transplant population.41  A new retrospective study included 1055 consecutive patients with various hematologic diseases who were either given NMA, 2 GY total body irradiation (TBI) ± fludarabine (Flu) (n = 294) or myeloablative cyclophosphamide (Cy)/12 Gy TBI or busulfan (Bu)/Cy (n = 761) conditioning followed by allo-HCT from related or unrelated donors. Patients were randomly distributed into training (n = 708) and validation (n = 347) sets. In the training set, investigators introduced three major conceptual changes to the CCI: 1) all comorbidities in the patients' past medical history or abnormal laboratory values immediately before start of conditioning were included41 ; 2) definitions of cardiac, pulmonary, hepatic, and renal comorbidities were refined by relying mainly on objective values of laboratory and organ function tests; and 3) new adjusted hazard ratios for NRM were calculated to constitute the foundation of the new weighted model. Scores were weighted for the impacts of all comorbidities, disease risk, conditioning intensity, and age. The investigators introduced the use of progressive impairments of left-ventricular ejection fraction for cardiac, DLco/FEV1 for pulmonary, and progressive elevations of bilirubin and transaminases for hepatic comorbidities. All of these parameters have been used to grade treatment toxicities per the Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) of the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Further, new cutoffs for serum creatinine levels were set to better define renal comorbidity. The analyses included 24 single comorbidities, and three of those, pulmonary, hepatic, and renal, had two or three levels of severity. Adjusted hazard ratios from Cox proportional hazard models identified 17 comorbidities to be independently predictive for NRM. Two comorbidities, pulmonary and hepatic, were represented twice based on severity, and three new comorbidities were added to the historical CCI: morbid obesity (as defined by the body mass index), infections, and psychiatric disturbances (Table 1).

Table 1.

The hematopoietic cell transplant-comorbidity index (HCT-CI)

The hematopoietic cell transplant-comorbidity index (HCT-CI)
The hematopoietic cell transplant-comorbidity index (HCT-CI)

*Diagnosed at any time in the patient's past history; §Values detected at the closest time prior to start of conditioning regimen.

ULN, upper limit of normal; DLco, diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide; FEV1, forced expiratory volume in one second; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase.

The design of the HCT-CI had the strength of including: 1) a fairly large sample size; 2) consecutively transplanted patients, as a good representation of the general population of patients transplanted at different institutions; and 3) a wide spectrum of diagnoses and conditioning regimens in the multivariate models. The increasing weights of the HCT-CI were meant to capture a general trend for increases in risks of NRM (scores 0, 1, 2, 3, and ≥ 4 predicted NRM of 9%, 14%, 27%, 41%, and 43%, respectively), the range of which would vary based on the intensity of conditioning regimens, risks of disease status, and other factors. In the validation set, and to facilitate comparisons, HCT-CI scores were collapsed into three risk groups 0, 1 to 2, and ≥ 3, which statistically significantly predicted NRM (14%, 21%, and 41%) and overall survival (71%, 60%, and 34%), respectively. By comparison, CCI scores of 0, 1, and ≥ 2 were associated with no differences in NRM (23%, 29%, and 25%, respectively). Compared with the CCI, the HCT-CI had higher c-statistics for 1-year NRM (0.692 vs. 0.546) and overall survival (0.661 vs. 0.561).

The HCT-CI summated the relevant pre-transplant organ comorbidities as a single risk factor, in which weights of comorbidity burdens were adjusted for the complex impacts of disease risks and conditioning intensities. This has created a new path for accurate risk-benefit ratio assessment before HCT.

The HCT-CI and Other Traditional Risk Factors for HCT Outcomes

One of the main advantages of summating patient comorbidities into the HCT-CI is the ability to consolidate this index with one or more risk factors for HCT outcomes to strengthen both statistical analyses for clinical prognostication and decision making for HCT choices. The HCT-CI has been combined with disease-specific factors such as disease status to better risk-stratify patients with AML or MDS before allo-HCT,42  lymph node size to refine outcomes of CLL patients after allo-HCT,43  or chemosensitivity to optimize indications of autologous HCT for lymphoma.44  It has also been combined with Karnofsky performance status (KPS) to classify NMA-HCT recipients into four risk groups for NRM and overall survival.45  Further, the HCT-CI and C-reactive protein (CRP) were recently used together to rationalize the indications of allo-HCT for patients with chronic myelocytic leukemia (CML) who failed imatinib therapy.46 

Allo-HCT for Patients with AML/MDS

FHCRC investigators reported 2-year overall survival of 70% and 78% among AML/MDS patients with HCT-CI scores of 0 to 2 and low-risk diseases following NMA- and myeloablative HCT, respectively.42  The figures for patients with high-risk diseases were 57% and 50%, respectively. Therefore, AML/MDS patients with low comorbidity burden could be targeted in prospective, randomized studies to determine the role of conditioning intensity. In contrast, patients with HCT-CI scores of ≥ 3 had relatively inferior survival rates in the FHCRC study, particularly those with high-risk diseases (overall survival of 29% and 24%, respectively). This was mainly due to relatively more frequent relapse (49%) among NMA patients and more frequent NRM (46%) among myeloablative patients. Interestingly, HCT-CI predicted not only increased NRM but also increased relapse rates. This was the first report to point out a possible biological link between pre-HCT comorbidities and leukemia aggressiveness. Further investigations are warranted.

Investigators from United Kingdom and the Netherlands confirmed the inferior overall survival of 32% among 128 patients with AML/MDS and HCT-CI scores of ≥ 3 after alemtuzumab-based RIC HCT.47  Patients with HCT-CI scores of 0 and 1 to 2 had an overall survival of 69% and 39%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, both the HCT-CI scores and disease status at HCT were the strongest predictors of increased NRM and poor survivals, similar to the FHCRC study, while chronological age was of no prognostic value. Results of both studies showed that patients with high comorbidity and disease burden might benefit from enrolling in clinical trials investigating dose-escalating conditioning regimens48,49  or exploring novel maintenance drugs after NMA regimens.50  Investigators from the European Group of Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) reported 2-year NRMs of 9%, 15%, 18%, and 31%, respectively, for HCT-CI scores of 0, 1, 2, and ≥ 3 among AML patients in a first complete remission given various reduced-intensity regimens.51  Boehm et al. confirmed the inferior survival of MDS patients with high HCT-CI scores after conditioning regimens of different intensities.52  In a different study, patients with CML, who were treated mostly with conventional allo-HCT and had HCT-CI scores of ≥ 3, were found to have overall survival of 15% compared with 54% for those with scores of 0 to 2.53 

In aggregate, patients with low-risk comorbidities might be better served by enrolling in randomized studies between myeloablative and RIC/NMA regimens, while patients with high HCT-CI scores could benefit from novel conditioning regimens that target leukemia while avoiding the lethal toxicities.

HCT for Patients with CLL, Lymphoma, or Multiple Myeloma

Conventional allo-HCT is notorious for causing high NRM (up to 50%) among patients with CLL or lymphoma.54,55  In the era of the HCT-CI, FHCRC investigators have shown the relatively high NRM (50%) after myeloablative HCT to be limited to patients with relevant comorbidities per the HCT-CI (scores > 0) resulting in overall survival of 35%. By comparison, more favorable NRM (28%) and overall survival (47%) rates were reported among recipients of 2 Gy TBI ± Flu and allo-HCT with HCT-CI scores > 0.56  Of particular interest, NRM was not different after the two conditioning regimens when patients had no comorbidities per the HCT-CI (15% and 18%, respectively). Not surprisingly, conditioning intensity and HCT-CI were the main influential factors for outcome prediction in the multivariate models. No differences could be detected in relapse rates after myeloablative or NMA regimens regardless of disease histology, suggesting a minimal role of conditioning intensity in this patient cohort. In another study of 82 CLL patients treated with NMA-HCT, the HCT-CI was combined with an adverse disease-feature, namely lymph node size over 5 cm, to stratify patients into four risk groups (Figure 1).43  Patients with or without comorbidities who had lymph node size under 5 cm achieved 5-year overall survival of 60% and 78%, respectively, while those with lymph node size ≥5 cm had overall survival of 27% and 43%, respectively.

Figure 1.

Kaplan-Meier probabilities of survival among patients with advanced CLL who were treated with allo-NMA-HCT as stratified into four risk groups on the basis of consolidated HCT-CI scores and lymph node diameter. Group I included patients who had no comorbidities and who had lymphadenopathy of < 5 cm (n = 28); group II, patients with comorbidities only (n = 34); group III, patients with lymphadenopathy of ≥ 5 cm only (n = 7); and group IV, patients with both comorbidities and lymphadenopathy of ≥ 5 cm (n = 13). Five-year survival rates were 78%, 60%, 43%, 27% for risk groups I, II, III, and IV, respectively. (From Sorror et al., 2008.43  Reprinted with permission. ©2008 American Society of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Figure 1.

Kaplan-Meier probabilities of survival among patients with advanced CLL who were treated with allo-NMA-HCT as stratified into four risk groups on the basis of consolidated HCT-CI scores and lymph node diameter. Group I included patients who had no comorbidities and who had lymphadenopathy of < 5 cm (n = 28); group II, patients with comorbidities only (n = 34); group III, patients with lymphadenopathy of ≥ 5 cm only (n = 7); and group IV, patients with both comorbidities and lymphadenopathy of ≥ 5 cm (n = 13). Five-year survival rates were 78%, 60%, 43%, 27% for risk groups I, II, III, and IV, respectively. (From Sorror et al., 2008.43  Reprinted with permission. ©2008 American Society of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Close modal

A study from Italy included 203 patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin's lymphoma, or multiple myeloma treated with either 2-Gy TBI-based NMA or Flu-Cy-based RIC regimens and allo-HCT.57  HCT-CI scores of 0 were associated with a favorable overall survival of 87% at 2 years, while scores of 1 to 2 and ≥ 3 were associated with overall survival of 51% and 49%, respectively. No statistically significant differences could be detected in overall survival between patients with scores of 1 to 2 or ≥ 3, suggesting equivocal tolerability of those patients to the RIC HCT. In multivariate analyses, HCT-CI and KPS were independent predictors of overall survival, while only HCT-CI predicted progression-free survival (Figure 2). Among 63 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients conditioned with the Flu/Cy regimen followed by allo-HCT, Pollack et al. confirmed the higher NRM (36.8%) associated with HCT-CI scores of ≥ 3 compared with 13.6% with scores of 0 to 2.58 

Figure 2.

(A) Cumulative incidence of non-relapse mortality (p = 0.04) and (B) progression-free survival (p < 0.001) as stratified by pretransplant HCT-CI among patients with lymphoma, CLL, and multiple myeloma. (From Farina et al., 2009.57  Reprinted with permission. ©2009 Macmillan Publishers, Ltd.)

Figure 2.

(A) Cumulative incidence of non-relapse mortality (p = 0.04) and (B) progression-free survival (p < 0.001) as stratified by pretransplant HCT-CI among patients with lymphoma, CLL, and multiple myeloma. (From Farina et al., 2009.57  Reprinted with permission. ©2009 Macmillan Publishers, Ltd.)

Close modal

The FHCRC investigators presented data at the ASH annual meeting summarizing the impacts of comorbidities on autologous HCT outcomes among 273 patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or Hodgkin's lymphoma.44  Patients with HCT-CI scores of 0 and 1 to 2 had similar NRM of 3% and 8%, suggesting equal tolerance to conditioning regimens. Patients with HCT-CI scores of 3 to 4 and ≥ 5 had NRM of 15% and 42%, respectively. The HCT-CI scores of ≥ 3, high lactate dehydrogenase, and chemo-resistance at HCT were independently associated with increased overall mortality. Patients who had the three unfavorable factors at HCT had median overall survival of 7.8 months.

From the aforementioned results, HCT-CI scores of more than 0 among CLL/lymphoma/multiple myeloma patients could be used as a criterion to favor NMA/RIC over conventional high-dose regimens. Autologous HCT might be more safely avoided in patients with HCT-CI scores of ≥ 5. Patients with adverse disease features (such as large lymph nodes or chemo-refractoriness) with no comorbidities might benefit from the intensity of the myeloablative HCT. Patients with adverse disease features and comorbidities might be better served by approaches combining NMA-allo-HCT with prior debulking autologous HCT,59  concurrent radiolabeled anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody,60  or proceeding disease-specific maintenance treatment.

Allo-HCT for Patients with CML

Investigators from the United Kingdom and Spain used the HCT-CI in combination with pre-HCT values of an inflammatory marker (CRP) to re-write HCT recommendations for patients with CML in the era of tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. First, they confirmed in a multivariate model the independent prognostic impact of the HCT-CI on NRM and overall survival among 271 CML patients who failed imatinib and were treated with Cy/TBI and allo-HCT. CRP levels of ≤ 9 ml/L also predicted relatively lessened NRM and better overall survival, and therefore investigators thought that both HCT-CI scores of 0 and CRP ≤ 9 ml/L would identify a group of CML patients with the most favorable outcome after allo-HCT. Patients with adverse comorbidities or high CRP levels might benefit from second-line tyrosine-kinase inhibitors.46 

Minimal results have been published so far to describe how the interaction between multiple comorbidities, represented by weighted scores, affect single-organ toxicity. FHCRC investigators have shown twice that increasing CCI and HCT-CI scores were associated with higher cumulative incidences of grade III and IV non-hematologic toxicities, as graded by the CTC of the NCI.1,45  Investigators from Canada found both the CCI and the HCT-CI scores of more than 0 to be associated with an increased number of organ systems with serious toxicity (at least grade 2 toxicity using the Seattle criteria61 ) and an increased total sum of toxicity grades for all organs, in addition to prolonged hospitalization after autologous HCT.56,62  FHCRC investigators have shown that CLL/lymphoma patients with no comorbidities spend less time in hospitals if the conditioning regimen for allo-HCT was of low intensity.56  Investigators from City of Hope found that patients with late post-HCT congestive heart failure more frequently had preceding hypertension, chronic renal insufficiency, chronic lung disease, and diabetes than those without. Further, preceding ≥ 2 comorbidities were associated with increased post-HCT congestive heart failure.63  A study from MDACC found increased incidence of post-HCT cardiac toxicities if patients had one of seven preceding cardiac comorbidities.64  Clearly, additional investigations are required to better predict and prevent organ toxicity based on preexisting multiple comorbidities.

Comorbidity is the presence of one or more additional organ-specific malfunctions in the presence of a separate primary disease. Comorbidity impacts are sensitive to definitions, and this is where indices are needed to provide specific, valid, and objective reproducible definitions for comorbidities. Performance or functional status is a simple evaluation of the overall fitness of the patient that mostly cannot be separated from the impact of the primary disease. It is already known that comorbidity indices and performance status scales independently predict cancer treatment outcomes.65  FHCRC investigators have shown weak correlations between HCT-CI and KPS among 341 patients with hematologic malignancies given NMA-allo-HCT. KPS was assigned prospectively by clinicians and retrieved retrospectively by the study investigators. Both HCT-CI and KPS independently predicted NRM and overall survival but with greater predictive power by the former. Given the relatively lessened NRM after NMA-HCT, a refined risk-stratification model was proposed by consolidating the HCT-CI and the KPS. The consolidated tool stratified NMA patients into four risk groups with overall survival of 68%, 58%, 41%, and 32%, respectively, at 2 years (Figure 3).45  Two other studies found KPS to independently predict NRM to a greater extent than comorbidities.66,67  The former study used a non-HCT-specific comorbidity index, and both studies transformed some Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores to KPS percentages, which was previously suggested to be associated with a high level of error.68 

Figure 3.

Kaplan-Meier probabilities of survival among patients with hematologic malignancies treated with allo-NMA-HCT as stratified into four risk groups based on a consolidated HCT-CI and KPS scale. Group I (solid black line) includes patients with HCT-CI scores of 0 to 2 and a KPS of > 80%; group II (dotted black line) includes patients with HCT-CI scores of 0 to 2 and a KPS of ≤ 80%; group III (solid blue line) includes patients with HCT-CI scores of ≥ 3 and a KPS of >80%; group IV (dotted blue line) includes patients with HCT-CI scores of ≥ 3 and a KPS of ≤ 80%. Survival rates at 2 years were 68%, 58%, 41%, 32% for risk groups I, II, III, and IV, respectively. (From Sorror et al., 2008.45  Reprinted with permission. ©2008, Wiley InterScience.)

Figure 3.

Kaplan-Meier probabilities of survival among patients with hematologic malignancies treated with allo-NMA-HCT as stratified into four risk groups based on a consolidated HCT-CI and KPS scale. Group I (solid black line) includes patients with HCT-CI scores of 0 to 2 and a KPS of > 80%; group II (dotted black line) includes patients with HCT-CI scores of 0 to 2 and a KPS of ≤ 80%; group III (solid blue line) includes patients with HCT-CI scores of ≥ 3 and a KPS of >80%; group IV (dotted blue line) includes patients with HCT-CI scores of ≥ 3 and a KPS of ≤ 80%. Survival rates at 2 years were 68%, 58%, 41%, 32% for risk groups I, II, III, and IV, respectively. (From Sorror et al., 2008.45  Reprinted with permission. ©2008, Wiley InterScience.)

Close modal

KPS was originally designed to measure self-care, daily activities, and evidence of disease, rendering it both a patient-specific and a disease-specific risk factor. Even though it was shown that impaired performance status is linked to increasing NRM, multiple other studies have failed to show any prediction of NRM by performance status.69–72  Moreover, impaired performance status is strongly correlated with high-risk diseases, and its impact on overall survival was found to be exclusively due to increasing rates of relapse and relapse-related mortality.70–72  These conflicting results on the impacts of performance status could be due to, in part, lack of guidelines for accurate performance status assessment and, in part, physician tendency to assign 100% performance status to patients with no active disease or gross disability and to look only at observation and physical examination rather than activities and daily living.73 

Nevertheless, there is now ample evidence in the HCT setting that comorbidities and performance status capture different levels of patients' health status. Both should be assessed for outcome prediction studies and clinical trial enrollments. Developing guidelines for performance status assignment and introducing concise geriatric assessment before HCT might improve our understanding of functional impairments at the time of HCT.

FHCRC investigators initially reported results on the validity of the discriminative power of the HCT-CI.41  Later, FHCRC and MDACC investigators confirmed the ability of the HCT-CI, scored by independent investigators at each institution, to accurately predict NRM among AML patients. Comparable NRM could be seen among both populations when stratified by the HCT-CI scores.74  Further, while FHCRC patients had 71% versus 56% overall survival compared with MDACC patients, respectively, the hazard ratio was 0.98 after adjusting for differences in comorbidities, stressing on the importance of including comorbidity indices in comparing trial results.

The success of the HCT-CI to predict NRM and overall survival was further demonstrated by FHCRC investigators in a relatively large number of disease-specific reports.42–44,53,56,75,76  Other investigators confirmed in at least 12 studies the strong prediction of HCT outcomes by the HCT-CI among overall or specific hematologic malignancies.45,47,52,58,62,77–84  At least five other studies reported on the ability of the HCT-CI to provide good prediction of conventional treatment outcomes among patients with AML or MDS, which adds another layer to the generalizability of this index.85–88  One study found the HCT-CI to be a sole independent predictor of outcomes among patients receiving relative or cord blood grafts, but of less strength in smaller samples of subgroup analyses.89  Only four studies disagreed with the validity of the HCT-CI for outcome prediction.67,72,90,91  In two of these four studies, the interpretation of results has been seriously limited by the small sample of patients (N = 81)90  and number of events and the lack of significant amount of data (pulmonary-function tests) necessary for accurate assignment of comorbidity weights.91  The other two studies included data from about 150 patients each, who were transplanted over long period of time dating back to early 1990s. Both of these studies reported a high prevalence of HCT-CI scores over 0 (82% and 71%, respectively) among recipients of myeloablative HCT.67,72  Changes in supportive care and/or differences in laboratory reporting of DLco and methods of correction for anemia92,93  might have been responsible for over-scoring of comorbidities and, hence, lack of significance of the HCT-CI in these two studies.

Reliability studies are in progress. The CCI has good inter-rater (0.74–0.945) and test-retest reliability (0.92) rates by interclass correlation coefficient. The HCT-CI is likely to have at least the same reliability rates, given that it was a step improvement over the CCI by adding objective laboratory tests. In general, appropriate sample size and number of events are of vital importance not only for accurate validation studies but also to ensure strong inter-rater reliability. Good sample size is a known approach for reducing error of measurement compared with actual group differences since, statistically, the increase of the true variance, with increase in sample size, would triple that of the error variance, resulting in more reliable data reporting. It still remains to be tested whether data managers, medical students, or nurses could be reliable for comorbidity coding. In general, one validates not a measurement instrument, but rather some use for which the instrument was developed. The HCT-CI increasing scores were meant to be associated with a trend of worsening outcomes with different ranges based on conditioning intensity, disease risk, and other factors. Therefore, care must be used when categorizing risk groups across different populations.94 

Nevertheless, overall results published so far support the validity of the HCT-CI as a reproducible and sensitive tool to capture relevant comorbidities and a powerful predictor of HCT outcomes.

CRP is an inflammatory biomarker thought to aid in host defense or to represent an imbalanced immune function of the host. Some results have indicated the prognostic value of pre-HCT CRP levels in predicting NRM and overall survival.90,95  One study found CRP levels to add additional prognostic information to the HCT-CI.46  Further studies are needed to clarify whether CRP levels are measurements of aggressive disease status, ongoing inflammatory/infectious process, or impaired host immunity. Whether biomarkers add additional prognostic information to comorbidities and performance status is unknown. Therefore, accounting for comorbidities and performance status in studies investigating the impacts of biomarkers is essential to ensuring accurate results and avoiding confounders.

FHCRC investigators have recently found high serum ferritin, low serum albumin, and low platelet count before HCT to have independent prognostic impacts on HCT outcomes that were additional to those of the HCT-CI.96  Serum ferritin could be another inflammatory biomarker or a representative of iron overload, which is known to increase post-HCT morbidity and mortality.97  Low serum albumin is a predictive for cardiovascular complications and mortality in the general and geriatric populations98,99  and has been used in other prognostic systems,100  but was never previously assessed as a pre-HCT predictor of outcomes. Low platelet counts might be a sensitive measure of the impacts of prior treatment on marrow function. Each of these laboratory values was assigned a score of 1 by the FHCRC investigators and incorporated into the HCT-CI. Validation of the prognostic power of the augmented HCT-CI remains to be investigated in an independent patient cohort.

Comorbidities are now in the forefront for optimizing risk assessment before autologous or allo-HCT for hematologic diseases. The HCT-CI has been shown to sensitively capture organ comorbidities and to provide valuable prognostic information for assignments of patients to clinical trials. Multiple research questions remain to be addressed (Table 2). Good sample size, roughly equal stratification of patients into risk groups, and the inclusion of possible confounders in the analyses would support the reliable use of the HCT-CI in future studies. Aging might be more accurately thought of as a three-dimensional variable incorporating chronologic age, comorbidities, and physical function. Comprehensive geriatric assessment incorporating comorbidities, physical function, nutritional and cognitive status, and socio-economic and emotional aspects might prove of value in preventing excessive mortality and disability similar to other oncologic settings.101  We are only beginning to learn about the interplay between different comorbidities and between comorbidities and other risk factors to shape patients' profile of morbidity and mortality after HCT. Further understanding of patient variables would allow us to minimize the risks of conventional and NMA/RIC HCT through refined decision making, and possibly to develop novel preventive measures for HCT toxicities. The ultimate goal is broader applicability of this unique potentially curative treatment option with lessened mortality and improved quality of life.

Table 2.

Future research questions and recommendations regarding comorbidities and HCT outcomes

Future research questions and recommendations regarding comorbidities and HCT outcomes
Future research questions and recommendations regarding comorbidities and HCT outcomes

The author would like to thank Bonnie Larson, Helen Crawford, Karen Carbonneau, and Sue Carbonneau for help with manuscript preparation. The author is grateful for research funding from NIH grants P01HL036444, P01CA078902, P01CA018029, P30CA015704, and K99HL088021. The content is solely the responsibility of the author and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or its subsidiary institutes and centers.

Conflict-of-interest disclosure: The author declares no competing financial interests.

Off-label drug use: No drugs are approved for preparative regimens for HCT, so all discussions about therapeutics are off-label.

Mohamed Sorror, MD, MSc, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave. N., PO Box 19024 Seattle, WA 98109; Phone: (206) 667-2765; Fax: (206) 667-6124; e-mail: msorror@fhcrc.org

1
Sorror
ML
Maris
MB
Storer
B
et al
Comparing morbidity and mortality of HLA-matched unrelated donor hematopoietic cell transplantation after nonmyeloablative and myeloablative conditioning: influence of pretransplant comorbidities
Blood
2004
104
4
961
968
2
Diaconescu
R
Flowers
CR
Storer
B
et al
Morbidity and mortality with nonmyeloablative compared to myeloablative conditioning before hematopoietic cell transplantation from HLA matched related donors
Blood
2004
104
5
1550
1558
3
Boeckh
M
Marr
KA
Rubin
RH
Young
LS
Infection in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Clinical Approach to Infection in the Compromised Host
2002
New York
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers
527
571
4
Junghanss
C
Marr
KA
Infectious risks and outcomes after stem cell transplantation: are nonmyeloablative transplants changing the picture?
Curr Opin Inf Dis
2002
15
347
353
5
Socié
G
Blazar
BR
Acute graft-versus-host disease; from the bench to the bedside
Blood
2009
114
20
4327
4336
6
Shimabukuro-Vornhagen
A
Hallek
MJ
Storb
RF
von Bergwelt-Baildon
MS
The role of B cells in the pathogenesis of graft-versus-host disease
Blood
2009
114
24
4919
4927
7
Teshima
T
Wynn
TA
Soiffer
RJ
Matsuoka
K
Martin
PJ
Chronic graft-versus-host disease: how can we release Prometheus?
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2008
1
14
1 Suppl 1
142
150
8
Tichelli
A
Rovo
A
Gratwohl
A
Late pulmonary, cardiovascular, and renal complications after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and recommended screening practices
Hematology
2008
125
133
9
Wong
FL
Francisco
L
Togawa
K
et al
Long-term recovery after hematopoietic cell transplantation: predictors of quality-of-life concerns
Blood
2010
115
12
2508
2519
10
Lowe
T
Bhatia
S
Somlo
G
Second malignancies after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2007
13
10
1121
1134
11
Bolwell
BJ
Are predictive factors clinically useful in bone marrow transplantation?
Bone Marrow Transplant
2003
32
9
853
861
12
Wong
R
Shahjahan
M
Wang
X
et al
Prognostic factors for outcomes of patients with refractory or relapsed acute myelogenous leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes undergoing allogeneic progenitor cell transplantation
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2005
11
2
108
114
13
Sorror
ML
Storer
B
Sandmaier
BM
et al
Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) after nonmyeloablative conditioning for patients (pts) aged > or = to 60 years [Abstract]
Blood
2008
112
11
753
754
#2162
14
McClune
BL
Weisdorf
DJ
Pedersen
TL
et al
Effect of age on outcome of reduced-intensity hematopoietic cell transplantation for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia in first complete remission or with myelodysplastic syndrome
J Clin Oncol
2010
28
11
1878
1887
15
Wedding
U
Rohrig
B
Klippstein
A
Pientka
L
Hoffken
K
Age, severe comorbidity and functional impairment independently contribute to poor survival in cancer patients
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol
2007
133
12
945
950
16
van Spronsen
DJ
Janssen-Heijnen
ML
Lemmens
VE
Peters
WG
Coebergh
JW
Independent prognostic effect of co-morbidity in lymphoma patients: results of the population-based Eindhoven Cancer Registry
Eur J Cancer
2005
41
7
1051
1057
17
de Groot
V
Beckerman
H
Lankhorst
GJ
Bouter
LM
How to measure comorbidity. a critical review of available methods
J Clin Epidemiol
2003
56
3
221
229
18
Piccirillo
JF
Vlahiotis
A
Barrett
LB
Flood
KL
Spitznagel
EL
Steyerberg
EW
The changing prevalence of comorbidity across the age spectrum
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol
2008
67
2
124
132
19
Gloeckler Ries
LA
Reichman
ME
Lewis
DR
Hankey
BF
Edwards
BK
Cancer survival and incidence from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program
Oncologist
2003
8
6
541
552
20
Bacigalupo
A
Ballen
K
Rizzo
D
et al
Defining the intensity of conditioning regimens: working definitions
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2009
15
12
1628
1633
21
Hertenstein
B
Stefanic
M
Schmeiser
T
et al
Cardiac toxicity of bone marrow transplantation: Predictive value of cardiologic evaluation before transplant
J Clin Oncol
1994
12
998
1004
22
Bearman
SI
Petersen
FB
Schor
RA
et al
Radionuclide ejection fractions in the evaluation of patients being considered for bone marrow transplantation: Risk for cardiac toxicity
Bone Marrow Transplant
1990
5
173
177
23
Fujimaki
K
Maruta
A
Yoshida
M
et al
Severe cardiac toxicity in hematological stem cell transplantation: predictive value of reduced left ventricular ejection fraction
Bone Marrow Transplant
2001
27
3
307
310
24
Crawford
SW
Fisher
L
Predictive value of pulmonary function tests before marrow transplantation
Chest
1992
101
1257
1264
25
Horak
DA
Schmidt
GM
Zaia
JA
Niland
JC
Ahn
C
Forman
SJ
Pretransplant pulmonary function predicts cytomegalovirus-associated interstitial pneumonia following bone marrow transplantation
Chest
1992
102
1484
1490
26
Parimon
T
Madtes
DK
Au
DH
Clark
JG
Chien
JW
Pretransplant lung function, respiratory failure, and mortality after stem cell transplantation
Am J Respir Crit Care Med
2005
172
3
384
390
27
Goldberg
SL
Klumpp
TR
Magdalinski
AJ
Mangan
KF
Value of the pretransplant evaluation in predicting toxic day-100 mortality among blood stem-cell and bone marrow transplant recipients
J Clin Oncol
1998
16
12
3796
3802
28
Savani
BN
Montero
A
Srinivasan
R
et al
Chronic GVHD and pretransplantation abnormalities in pulmonary function are the main determinants predicting worsening pulmonary function in long-term survivors after stem cell transplantation
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2006
12
12
1261
1269
29
Chien
JW
Maris
MB
Sandmaier
BM
Maloney
DG
Storb
RF
Clark
JG
Comparison of lung function after myeloablative and 2 Gy of total body irradiation-based regimens for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2005
11
288
296
30
McDonald
GB
Hinds
MS
Fisher
LD
et al
Veno-occlusive disease of the liver and multiorgan failure after bone marrow transplantation: a cohort study of 355 patients
Ann Intern Med
1993
118
4
255
267
31
Rozman
C
Carreras
E
Qian
C
et al
Risk factors for hepatic veno-occlusive disease following HLA-identical sibling bone marrow transplants for leukemia
Bone Marrow Transplant
1996
17
1
75
80
32
Ozdogan
O
Ratip
S
Ahdab
YA
et al
Causes and risk factors for liver injury following bone marrow transplantation
J Clin Gastroenterol
2003
36
5
421
426
33
Gruss
E
Bernis
C
Tomas
JF
et al
Acute renal failure in patients following bone marrow transplantation: prevalence, risk factors and outcome
Am J Nephrol
1995
15
6
473
479
34
Loberiza
FRJ
Rizzo
JD
Bredeson
CN
et al
Association of depressive syndrome and early deaths among patients after stem-cell transplantation for malignant diseases
J Clin Oncol
2002
20
8
2118
2126
35
Sorror
ML
Maris
M
Storer
B
et al
Transplant-related toxicities (TRT) and mortality following HLA-matched unrelated donor hematopoietic cell transplantation (URD-HCT) using nonmyeloablative (NM) compared to myeloablative (M) conditioning: influence of pretransplant comorbidities [Abstract]
Blood
2003
102
11
(
part 1
)
78a
36
Charlson
ME
Pompei
P
Ales
KL
MacKenzie
CR
A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation
J Chronic Dis
1987
40
5
373
383
37
Sorror
ML
Maris
MB
Sandmaier
BM
et al
Hematopoietic cell transplantation after nonmyeloablative conditioning for advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia
J Clin Oncol
2005
23
16
3819
3829
38
Shahjahan
M
Alamo
J
DeLima
M
et al
Impact of comorbidity on the outcome of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in AML/MDS patients [Abstract]
Blood
2003
102
11
(
part 1
)
708a
39
Charlson
M
Szatrowski
TP
Peterson
J
Gold
J
Validation of a combined comorbidity index
J Clin Epidemiol
1994
47
11
1245
1251
40
Pollyea
DA
Artz
AS
Stock
W
et al
Clinical predictors of transplant related mortality after reduced intensity allogeneic stem cell transplantation (RIST) [Abstract]
Blood
2004
104
11
(
part 1
)
324a
41
Sorror
ML
Maris
MB
Storb
R
et al
Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT)-specific comorbidity index: a new tool for risk assessment before allogeneic HCT
Blood
2005
106
8
2912
2919
42
Sorror
ML
Sandmaier
BM
Storer
BE
et al
Comorbidity and disease status-based risk stratification of outcomes among patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplasia receiving allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation
J Clin Oncol
2007
25
27
4246
4254
43
Sorror
ML
Storer
BE
Sandmaier
BM
et al
Five-year follow-up of patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia treated with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation after nonmyeloablative conditioning
J Clin Oncol
2008
26
30
4912
4920
44
Sorror
M
Storer
B
Gopal
A
et al
Comorbidity, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and chemosensitivity are independent predictors of mortality after autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for patients (pts) with lymphoma [Abstract]
Blood
2007
110
11
(
part 1
)
190a
45
Sorror
M
Storer
B
Sandmaier
BM
et al
Hematopoietic cell transplantation-comorbidity index and Karnofsky performance status are independent predictors of morbidity and mortality after allogeneic nonmyeloablative hematopoietic cell transplantation
Cancer
2008
112
1992
2001
46
Pavlu
J
Kew
AK
Taylor-Roberts
B
et al
Optimizing patient selection for myeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase
Blood
2010
5
20
115
20
4018
4020
47
Lim
ZY
Ingram
W
Brand
R
et al
Impact of pretransplant comorbidities on alemtuzumab-based reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic SCT for patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome and AML
Bone Marrow Transplant
2010
45
4
633
639
48
Pagel
JM
Gooley
TA
Rajendran
J
et al
Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation after conditioning with 131I-anti-CD45 antibody plus fludarabine and low-dose total body irradiation for elderly patients with advanced acute myeloid leukemia or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome
Blood
2009
114
27
5444
5453
49
Nemecek
E
Sorror
ML
Doney
KC
et al
A regimen of treosulfan and fludarabine followed by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for high-risk hematologic malignancies is associated with low treatment-related mortality [Abstract]
Blood
2008
112
11
1029
50
Kornblith
AB
Herndon
JE
Silverman
LR
et al
Impact of azacytidine on the quality of life of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome treated in a randomized phase III trial: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study
J Clin Oncol
2002
20
10
2441
2452
51
Mohty
M
Labopin
M
Basara
N
et al
Association between the Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation-Specific Comorbidity Index (CI) and non-relapse mortality (NRM) after reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first complete remission (CR1) [Abstract]
Blood
2009
114
22
270
52
Boehm
A
Sperr
WR
Leitner
G
et al
Comorbidity predicts survival in myelodysplastic syndromes or secondary acute myeloid leukaemia after allogeneic stem cell transplantation
Eur J Clin Invest
2008
38
12
945
952
53
Kerbauy
DMB
Chyou
F
Gooley
T
et al
Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for chronic myelomonocytic leukemia
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2005
11
713
720
54
Verdonck
LF
Dekker
AW
Lokhorst
HM
Petersen
EJ
Nieuwenhuis
HK
Allogeneic versus autologous bone marrow transplantation for refractory and recurrent low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma
Blood
1997
90
10
4201
4205
55
Gribben
JG
Zahrieh
D
Stephans
K
et al
Autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantations for poor-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia
Blood
2005
106
13
4389
4396
56
Sorror
ML
Storer
BE
Maloney
DG
Sandmaier
BM
Martin
PJ
Storb
R
Outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation with nonmyeloablative or myeloablative regimens for treatment of lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia
Blood
2008
111
1
446
452
57
Farina
L
Bruno
B
Patriarca
F
et al
The hematopoietic cell transplantation comorbidity index (HCT-CI) predicts clinical outcomes in lymphoma and myeloma patients after reduced-intensity or non-myeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation
Leukemia
2009
23
6
1131
1138
58
Pollack
SM
Steinberg
SM
Odom
J
Dean
RM
Fowler
DH
Bishop
MR
Assessment of the hematopoietic cell transplantation comorbidity index in non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients receiving reduced-intensity allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2009
15
2
223
230
59
Sorror
ML
Storer
B
Sandmaier
BM
Chauncey
T
Storb
RF
Maloney
DG
Tandem autologous and nonmyeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) from HLA-matched related or unrelated donors for advanced lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) [Abstract]
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2009
15
suppl 2
66
60
Gopal
AK
Rajendran
JG
Pagel
JM
et al
A phase II trial of 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan-based reduced intensity allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplantation for relapsed CD20+ B-cell non-Hodgkins lymphoma (NHL) [Abstract]
Blood
2006
108
11
(
part 1
)
98a
61
Bearman
SI
Appelbaum
FR
Buckner
CD
et al
Regimen-related toxicity in patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation
J Clin Oncol
1988
6
1562
1568
62
Labonté
L
Iqbal
T
Zaidi
MA
et al
Utility of comorbidity assessment in predicting transplantation-related toxicity following autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2008
14
9
1039
1044
63
Armenian
SH
Sun
CL
Francisco
L
et al
Late congestive heart failure after hematopoietic cell transplantation
J Clin Oncol
2008
26
34
5537
5543
64
Qazilbash
MH
Amjad
AI
Qureshi
S
et al
Outcome of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with low left ventricular ejection fraction
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2009
15
10
1265
1270
65
Extermann
M
Overcash
J
Lyman
GH
Parr
J
Balducci
L
Comorbidity and functional status are independent in older cancer patients
J Clin Oncol
1998
16
4
1582
1587
66
Artz
AS
Pollyea
DA
Kocherginsky
M
et al
Performance status and comorbidity predict transplant-related mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2006
12
9
954
964
67
Guilfoyle
R
Demers
A
Bredeson
C
et al
Performance status, but not the hematopoietic cell transplantation comorbidity index (HCT-CI), predicts mortality at a Canadian transplant center
Bone Marrow Transplant
2009
43
2
133
139
68
Verger
E
Salamero
M
Conill
C
Can Karnofsky performance status be transformed to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scoring scale and vice versa?
Eur J Cancer
1992
28A
8–9
1328
1330
69
Dreger
P
Brand
R
Hansz
J
et al
Treatment-related mortality and graft-versus-leukemia activity after allogeneic stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia using intensity-reduced conditioning
Leukemia
2003
17
5
841
848
70
Anderson
JE
Litzow
MR
Appelbaum
FR
et al
Allogeneic, syngeneic, and autologous marrow transplantation for Hodgkin's disease: the 21 year Seattle experience
J Clin Oncol
1993
11
2342
2350
71
Deschler
B
Binek
K
Ihorst
G
et al
Prognostic factor and quality of life analysis in 160 patients aged > or = to 60 years with hematologic neoplasias treated with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2010
7
16
7
967
975
72
Terwey
TH
Hemmati
PG
Martus
P
et al
A modifed EBMT risk score and the hematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index for pre-transplant risk assessment in adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia
Haematologica
2010
5
95
5
810
818
73
Schag
CC
Heinrich
RL
Ganz
PA
Karnofsky performance status revisited: reliability, validity, and guidelines
J Clin Oncol
1984
2
3
187
193
74
Sorror
ML
Giralt
S
Sandmaier
BM
et al
Hematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index as an outcome predictor for patients with acute myeloid leukemia in first remission: Combined FHCRC and MDACC experiences
Blood
2007
110
13
4608
4613
75
Kerbauy
DMB
Gooley
TA
Sale
GE
et al
Hematopoietic cell transplantation as curative therapy for idiopathic myelofibrosis, advanced polycythemia vera, and essential thrombocythemia
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2007
13
3
355
365
76
Gyurkocza
B
Cao
TM
Storb
RF
et al
Salvage allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation with fludarabine and low-dose total body irradiation after rejection of first allografts
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2009
15
1314
1322
77
Maruyama
D
Fukuda
T
Kato
R
et al
Comparable antileukemia/lymphoma effects in nonremission patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation with a conventional cytoreductive or reduced-intensity regimen
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2007
13
8
932
941
78
Fujimaki
K
Sakai
R
Fujisawa
S
et al
Usefulness of hematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation [Article in Japanese]
Gan to Kagaku Ryoho [Japanese Journal of Cancer & Chemotherapy]
2008
35
1
87
91
79
Majhail
NS
Brunstein
CG
Tomblyn
M
et al
Reduced-intensity allogeneic transplant in patients older than 55 years: unrelated umbilical cord blood is safe and effective for patients without a matched related donor
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2008
14
3
282
289
80
Lim
S-N
Lee
J-H
Lee
J-H
et al
Pre-transplant comorbidity as an outcome predictor in hematopoietic cell transplantation for severe aplastic anemia [Abstract]
Blood
2008
112
11
4295
81
Kataoka
K
Nannya
Y
Ueda
K
Kumano
K
Takahashi
T
Kurokawa
M
Differential prognostic impact of pretransplant comorbidity on transplant outcomes by disease status and time from transplant: a single Japanese transplant centre study
Bone Marrow Transplant
2010
3
45
3
513
520
82
Barba
P
Piñana
JL
Martino
R
et al
Comparison of two pretransplant predictive models and a flexible HCT-CI using different cut points to determine low, intermediate and high risk groups: the flexible HCT-CI is the best predictor of NRM and OS in a population of patients undergoing allo-RIC
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2010
3
16
3
413
420
83
Farina
L
Bruno
B
Patriarca
F
et al
The hematopoietic cell transplantation comorbidity index (HCT-CI) predicts clinical outcomes in lymphoma and myeloma patients after reduced-intensity or non-myeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation
Leukemia
2009
6
23
6
1131
1138
84
Lim
ZY
Ingram
W
Brand
R
et al
Impact of pretransplant comorbidities on alemtuzumab-based reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic SCT for patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome and AML
Bone Marrow Transplant
2010
4
45
4
633
639
85
Zipperer
E
Pelz
D
Nachtkamp
K
et al
The hematopoietic stem cell transplantation comorbidity index is of prognostic relevance for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome
Haematologica
2009
94
5
729
732
86
Sperr
WR
Wimazal
F
Kundi
M
et al
Comorbidity as prognostic variable in MDS: comparative evaluation of the HCT-CI and CCI in a core dataset of 419 patients of the Austrian MDS Study Group
Ann Oncol
2010
21
1
114
119
87
Giles
FJ
Borthakur
G
Ravandi
F
et al
The haematopoietic cell transplantation comorbidity index score is predictive of early death and survival in patients over 60 years of age receiving induction therapy for acute myeloid leukaemia
Br J Haematol
2007
136
4
624
627
88
Breccia
M
Frustaci
AM
Cannella
L
et al
Comorbidities and FLT3-ITD abnormalities as independent prognostic indicators of survival in elderly acute myeloid leukaemia patients
Hematol Oncol
2009
27
3
148
153
89
Majhail
NS
Brunstein
CG
McAvoy
S
et al
Does the hematopoietic cell transplantation specific comorbidity index predict transplant outcomes? A validation study in a large cohort of umbilical cord blood and matched related donor transplants
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2008
14
9
985
992
90
Artz
AS
Wickrema
A
Dinner
S
et al
Pretreatment C-reactive protein is a predictor for outcomes after reduced-intensity allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2008
14
11
1209
1216
91
Xhaard
A
Porcher
R
Chien
JW
et al
Impact of comorbidity indexes on non-relapse mortality
Leukemia
2008
22
2062
2069
92
Cotes
JE
Dabbs
JM
Elwood
PC
Hall
AM
McDonald
A
Saunders
MJ
Iron-deficiency anaemia: its effect on transfer factor for the lung (diffusiong capacity) and ventilation and cardiac frequency during sub-maximal exercise
Clin Sci
1972
42
3
325
335
93
Dinakara
P
Blumenthal
WS
Johnston
RF
Kauffman
LA
Solnick
PB
The effect of anemia on pulmonary diffusing capacity with derivation of a correction equation
Am Rev Respir Dis
1970
102
6
965
969
94
Sorror
ML
Storer
B
Storb
R
Assignment of scores for the hematopoietic cell transplantation-comorbidity index: integer vs exact weights [Letter to the Editor]
Bone Marrow Transplant
In press
95
Kew
A
Szydlo
RM
Olavarria
E
Goldman
JM
Apperley
JF
C-reactive protein on admission predicts transplant-related mortality in recipients of allogeneic stem cell transplant [Abstract]
Blood
2007
110
11
882A
883A
96
Sorror
ML
Storer
BE
Schoch
G
et al
Low albumin, high ferritin, and thrombocytopenia before transplant predict non-relapse mortality (NRM) independent of the hematopoeitic cell transplantation comorbidity index (HCT-CI) [Abstract]
Blood
2009
114
22
271
97
Deeg
HJ
Spaulding
E
Shulman
HM
Iron overload, hematopoietic cell transplantation, and graft-versus-host disease
Leuk Lymphoma
2009
50
10
1566
1572
98
Corti
MC
Guralnik
JM
Salive
ME
Sorkin
JD
Serum albumin level and physical disability as predictors of mortality in older persons
JAMA
1994
272
13
1036
1042
99
Djousse
L
Rothman
KJ
Cupples
LA
Levy
D
Ellison
RC
Serum albumin and risk of myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality in the Framingham Offspring Study
Circulation
2002
106
23
2919
2924
100
Knaus
WA
Wagner
DP
Draper
EA
et al
The APACHE III prognostic system: risk prediction of hospital mortality for critically ill hospitalized adults
Chest
1991
100
6
1619
1636
101
Brunello
A
Sandri
R
Extermann
M
Multidimensional geriatric evaluation for older cancer patients as a clinical and research tool
Cancer Treat Rev
2009
35
6
487
492