Table 4.

Comparison of select GvHD prevention approaches in transplant for hematologic malignancies

ApproachSevere aGvHDcGvHDGraft failureRelapseImmune reconstitution/ viral infectionsOptimal use
Abatacept Decreased No impact No impact No impact observed No impact/increased reactivation without severe disease Unrelated donor (especially mismatched) 
Posttransplant cyclophosphamide Decreased Decreased Possibly increased Increased in some studies Delayed in some studies/ increased grade 2 infections Unrelated, haploidentical 
Selective ex vivo graft manipulation Decreased Decreased Increased No impact observed Varies by approach, enhanced related to other T-cell depletion approaches Unrelated, haploidentical (clinical trial) 
ApproachSevere aGvHDcGvHDGraft failureRelapseImmune reconstitution/ viral infectionsOptimal use
Abatacept Decreased No impact No impact No impact observed No impact/increased reactivation without severe disease Unrelated donor (especially mismatched) 
Posttransplant cyclophosphamide Decreased Decreased Possibly increased Increased in some studies Delayed in some studies/ increased grade 2 infections Unrelated, haploidentical 
Selective ex vivo graft manipulation Decreased Decreased Increased No impact observed Varies by approach, enhanced related to other T-cell depletion approaches Unrelated, haploidentical (clinical trial) 

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal