Multivariate analysis comparing graft failure, acute and chronic GVHD, relapse, and treatment failure after T-cell-depleted versus non-T-cell-depleted alternative donor transplants4-150
| . | Relative risk4-150 (95% CI) . | P . | Adjusted probability4-151 . | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (95% CI) . | P‡ (pointwise) . | |||
| Graft failure (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | — | 6 ± 2% | |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 1.65 (1.01-2.71) | .05 | 10 ± 4% | 1 vs 2: .04 |
| 3. Other T-depleted | 3.37 (2.26-5.02) | .0001 | 19 ± 5% | 1 vs 3: .0001 |
| Grades 2-4 acute GVHD (100 days) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | — | 57 ± 3% | |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 0.57 (0.47-0.68) | .0001 | 38 ± 5% | 1 vs 2: .0001 |
| 3. Other T-depleted | 0.50 (0.41-0.61) | .0001 | 34 ± 5% | 1 vs 3: .0001 |
| Chronic GVHD (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | — | 52 ± 5% | |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 1.50 (1.20-1.88) | .0003 | 61 ± 7% | 1 vs 2: .05 |
| 3. Other T-depleted | 0.86 (0.64-1.14) | NS | 47 ± 10% | 1 vs 3: NS |
| Transplant related mortality (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | 53 ± 4% | — | |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 1.18 (.99-1.39) | NS | 64 ± 6% | 1 vs 2 .003 |
| 3. Other T-depleted | 1.60 (1.36-1.88) | .0001 | 71 ± 6% | 1 vs 3 <.0001 |
| Relapse (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | — | 31 ± 5% | — |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | ||||
| < 2 months4-155 | 0.53 (0.31-0.92) | .02 | ||
| ≥ 2 months | 1.06 (0.77-1.45) | NS | 28 ± 7% | 1 vs 2: NS |
| 3. Other T-depleted | ||||
| < 2 months4-155 | 0.68 (0.40-1.15) | NS | ||
| ≥ 2 months | 1.87 (1.38-2.54) | .0001 | 51 ± 11% | 1 vs 3: .001 |
| Treatment failure (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | 31 ± 4%4-154 | ||
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 1.01 (0.87-1.16) | NS | 29 ± 5%4-154 | 1 vs 2: NS |
| 3. Other T-depleted | ||||
| < 2 months4-155 | 1.15 (0.94-1.42) | NS | ||
| ≥ 2 months | 1.79 (1.50-2.12) | .0001 | 16 ± 4%4-154 | 1 vs 3: .0001 |
| . | Relative risk4-150 (95% CI) . | P . | Adjusted probability4-151 . | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (95% CI) . | P‡ (pointwise) . | |||
| Graft failure (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | — | 6 ± 2% | |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 1.65 (1.01-2.71) | .05 | 10 ± 4% | 1 vs 2: .04 |
| 3. Other T-depleted | 3.37 (2.26-5.02) | .0001 | 19 ± 5% | 1 vs 3: .0001 |
| Grades 2-4 acute GVHD (100 days) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | — | 57 ± 3% | |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 0.57 (0.47-0.68) | .0001 | 38 ± 5% | 1 vs 2: .0001 |
| 3. Other T-depleted | 0.50 (0.41-0.61) | .0001 | 34 ± 5% | 1 vs 3: .0001 |
| Chronic GVHD (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | — | 52 ± 5% | |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 1.50 (1.20-1.88) | .0003 | 61 ± 7% | 1 vs 2: .05 |
| 3. Other T-depleted | 0.86 (0.64-1.14) | NS | 47 ± 10% | 1 vs 3: NS |
| Transplant related mortality (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | 53 ± 4% | — | |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 1.18 (.99-1.39) | NS | 64 ± 6% | 1 vs 2 .003 |
| 3. Other T-depleted | 1.60 (1.36-1.88) | .0001 | 71 ± 6% | 1 vs 3 <.0001 |
| Relapse (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | — | 31 ± 5% | — |
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | ||||
| < 2 months4-155 | 0.53 (0.31-0.92) | .02 | ||
| ≥ 2 months | 1.06 (0.77-1.45) | NS | 28 ± 7% | 1 vs 2: NS |
| 3. Other T-depleted | ||||
| < 2 months4-155 | 0.68 (0.40-1.15) | NS | ||
| ≥ 2 months | 1.87 (1.38-2.54) | .0001 | 51 ± 11% | 1 vs 3: .001 |
| Treatment failure (5 y) | ||||
| 1. Non-T-depleted | 1.004-153 | 31 ± 4%4-154 | ||
| 2. Narrow specificity antibody | 1.01 (0.87-1.16) | NS | 29 ± 5%4-154 | 1 vs 2: NS |
| 3. Other T-depleted | ||||
| < 2 months4-155 | 1.15 (0.94-1.42) | NS | ||
| ≥ 2 months | 1.79 (1.50-2.12) | .0001 | 16 ± 4%4-154 | 1 vs 3: .0001 |
GVHD, graft-versus-host disease.
Other significant risk factors for graft failure were disease, donor age, Karnofsky performance score, donor type and degree of HLA histocompatibility, conditioning regimen, drugs given for GVHD prophylaxis, year of transplantation, cell dose.
Other significant risk factors for acute GVHD were disease, donor age, donor type and degree of HLA histocompatibility, year of transplantation.
Other significant risk factors for chronic GVHD were disease, donor age, year of transplantation, GVHD prophylaxis with drugs, Karnofsky performance score, donor type and degree of HLA histocompatibility, prophylactic use of growth factors.
Other significant risk factors for transplant-related mortality were pretransplant disease state, patient age, donor type and degree of HLA histocompatibility, donor recipient cytomegalovirus status, Karnofsky performance score.
Other significant risk factors for relapse were pretransplant disease state, Karnofsky performance score, white blood cell count at diagnosis, donor type and degree of HLA histocompatibility.
Other significant risk factors for LFS were pretransplant disease state, patient age, Karnofsky performance score, donor type and degree of HLA histocompatibility, year of transplantation and white cell count.
Adjusted probabilities estimated from the multivariate model assuming a distribution of prognostic factors equal to that in the entire study population.
Significance test based on the 95% CI of the difference in at graft failure, chronic GVHD, relapse and LFS at 5 y, and for acute GVHD at 100 d.
Reference group.
Because of nonproportional hazards in the Cox proportional hazards regression models, indicating different risks of treatment failure for the first 2 months after transplantation and the period thereafter, models were fit with a time-varying covariate for T-cell depletion.
Probability of leukemia-free survival.