Figure 4.
OS and TRM among allogeneic and autologous HCT reciepients, MC-TA-TMA vs no MC-TA-TMA. OS (A,C) and TRM (B,D) of allogeneic and autologous MC-TA-TMA among recipients of allogeneic HCT (n = 205). OS was significantly lower (A) (P < .0001, log-rank test) and TRM was significantly higher (B) (P < .0001, Gray’s test) in allogeneic recipients (n = 205) who met Jodele criteria for TA-TMA. (C) Among recipients of autologous HCT (n = 102), there was no significant difference in OS among patients MC-TA-TMA vs those who did not (P = .0704, log-rank test). (D) However, TRM was significantly higher in patients MC-TA-TMA (P < .0001, Gray’s test).

OS and TRM among allogeneic and autologous HCT reciepients, MC-TA-TMA vs no MC-TA-TMA. OS (A,C) and TRM (B,D) of allogeneic and autologous MC-TA-TMA among recipients of allogeneic HCT (n = 205). OS was significantly lower (A) (P < .0001, log-rank test) and TRM was significantly higher (B) (P < .0001, Gray’s test) in allogeneic recipients (n = 205) who met Jodele criteria for TA-TMA. (C) Among recipients of autologous HCT (n = 102), there was no significant difference in OS among patients MC-TA-TMA vs those who did not (P = .0704, log-rank test). (D) However, TRM was significantly higher in patients MC-TA-TMA (P < .0001, Gray’s test).

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal