2016
DOI: 10.5045/br.2016.51.3.152
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pre-engraftment syndrome: clinical significance and pathophysiology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
7
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Overall, the dose level: 1.0 × 10 6 cells/kg was well-tolerated with no infusional toxicity or impact on engraftment. Specific presentation of high fevers associated with non-specific inflammatory rash and elevated IL-6 levels in the post-transplant period of patients receiving fucosylated UCB Tregs may be consistent with pre-engraftment syndrome [ 6 , 7 ]. It is unclear whether the short course of systemic steroids impacted efficacy of infused UCB Tregs, since all patients developed GVHD, however, it is important to consider that the infused donor T cells were significantly higher (12-356 times) than the infused Tregs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, the dose level: 1.0 × 10 6 cells/kg was well-tolerated with no infusional toxicity or impact on engraftment. Specific presentation of high fevers associated with non-specific inflammatory rash and elevated IL-6 levels in the post-transplant period of patients receiving fucosylated UCB Tregs may be consistent with pre-engraftment syndrome [ 6 , 7 ]. It is unclear whether the short course of systemic steroids impacted efficacy of infused UCB Tregs, since all patients developed GVHD, however, it is important to consider that the infused donor T cells were significantly higher (12-356 times) than the infused Tregs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 103 , 104 Although a uniform definition is lacking, PES has overlapping features with hyperacute GVHD and engraftment syndrome (ES), which are commonly characterized by noninfectious fever, erythematous rash, diarrhea, jaundice, and capillary leak syndrome (CLS), including noncardiogenic fluid retention or pulmonary manifestations such as tachypnea, hypoxemia, and pulmonary edema, before neutrophil engraftment. 103 , 104 , 105 The pathogenesis and severity classification are still not clear; PES may be caused by cytokine storms associated with toxicities of the conditioning regimen, GVHD prophylaxis drugs, DMSO, G‐CSF, or mismatched antigens by donor T cells. However, heterogeneity of the conditioning regimens and specific GVHD prophylaxis strategies may account for the different ranges (20‐78%) of the reported incidences of PES.…”
Section: Major Strategies For Improvementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A randomized study is required to determine whether omitting ATG confers a survival advantage for patients undergoing UCBT.4.5 | Pre-engraftment syndromePre-engraftment syndrome (PES) was initially described as a preengraftment immune reaction (PIR) in 2005 and was first proposed by Professor Young-Ho Lee 103,104. Although a uniform definition is lacking, PES has overlapping features with hyperacute GVHD and engraftment syndrome (ES), which are commonly characterized by noninfectious fever, erythematous rash, diarrhea, jaundice, and capillary leak syndrome (CLS), including noncardiogenic fluid retention or pulmonary manifestations such as tachypnea, hypoxemia, and pulmonary edema, before neutrophil engraftment [103][104][105]. The pathogenesis and severity classification are still not clear; PES may be caused by cytokine storms associated with toxicities of the conditioning regimen, GVHD prophylaxis drugs, DMSO, G-CSF, or mismatched antigens by donor T cells.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Los factores de riesgo para su aparición y fisiopatología son poco claros; no obstante, la mayoría de los investigadores señala que es más común después de recibir el acondicionamiento mieloablativo, además de su relación con elevado riesgo de enfermedad injerto contra huésped aguda. 12 El diagnóstico de la enfermedad se establece por los hallazgos clínicos, mediante los criterios de Spitzer, incluso no debe haber recuperación en la cifra de neutrófilos al momento de la aparición de los síntomas. 13 Deben considerarse tres criterios mayores, o dos criterios mayores y uno o más de los criterios menores, sin características clínicas ni patológicas de síntomas y signos de enfermedad injerto contra huésped, infección y, en caso de afectación de la piel, farmacodermia.…”
Section: Gerardo López Hernándezunclassified