Table 4.

Logistic regression model to examine H–Y antibodies and transplantation outcomes



≥1 H–Y antibody detected


Clinical outcomes
Yes n = 39 (%)
No n = 36 (%)
Unadjusted odds ratio (95% CI)
Adjusted odds ratio*(95% CI)
Acute GVHD II-IV   10 (26)   15 (42)   0.48 (0.18-1.28)   0.24 (0.05-1.23)  
Acute GVHD 0-I   29 (74)   21 (58)  P = .15  P = .11  
Chronic GVHD   34 (87)   11 (31)   15.5 (4.8-50.1)   56.5 (7.5-425)  
No cGVHD   5 (13)   25 (69)  P < .0001  P < .0001  
Relapse   0   13 (36)   0.02 (0.001-0.39)   —  
No relapse   39 (100)   23 (64)  P < .0001   
cGVHD and no relapse   34 (87)   11 (31)   7.4 (2.1-25.8)  22.2 (2.4-206) 
No cGVHD and no relapse   5 (13)   12 (33)  P = .001 P = .006 
Relapse and no cGVHD
 
0 (0)
 
13 (36)
 
0.08 (0.004-1.7)
 

 


≥1 H–Y antibody detected


Clinical outcomes
Yes n = 39 (%)
No n = 36 (%)
Unadjusted odds ratio (95% CI)
Adjusted odds ratio*(95% CI)
Acute GVHD II-IV   10 (26)   15 (42)   0.48 (0.18-1.28)   0.24 (0.05-1.23)  
Acute GVHD 0-I   29 (74)   21 (58)  P = .15  P = .11  
Chronic GVHD   34 (87)   11 (31)   15.5 (4.8-50.1)   56.5 (7.5-425)  
No cGVHD   5 (13)   25 (69)  P < .0001  P < .0001  
Relapse   0   13 (36)   0.02 (0.001-0.39)   —  
No relapse   39 (100)   23 (64)  P < .0001   
cGVHD and no relapse   34 (87)   11 (31)   7.4 (2.1-25.8)  22.2 (2.4-206) 
No cGVHD and no relapse   5 (13)   12 (33)  P = .001 P = .006 
Relapse and no cGVHD
 
0 (0)
 
13 (36)
 
0.08 (0.004-1.7)
 

 

— indicates odds ratio is not determinable.

*

Logistic regression model variables included patient age, donor age, related versus unrelated donors, bone marrow versus peripheral blood stem cell source, myeloablative versus nonablative conditioning regimens, T-cell depletion, disease at conditioning, good prognosis at conditioning, and acute GVHD

“No cGVHD and no relapse” is the referent group

cGVHD and no relapse versus no cGVHD and no relapse

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal