Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2018 Jun 19;24(10):2040–2046. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.06.010

Table 2:

Characteristics of study population

Variable N (%)

Number of patients 124
Number of centers 34
Patient-related variables
Age at HSCT, years
    Median (range) 9 (1–21.5)
    0–9 67 (54)
    10–21 57 (46)
Sex
    Male 71 (57)
    Female 53 (43)
Race
    Caucasian 102 (82)
    Non-Caucasian 19 (15)
    Declined/Unknown 3 ( 2)
Performance Score
    ≥ 90 102 (82)
    < 90 22 (18)
HCT-CI
    No comorbidity 70 (56)
    1–2 31 (25)
    ≥ 3 23 (18)
Disease-related variables
Disease status
    CR1 67 (54)
    CR2 46 (37)
    Therapy-related AML at any stage 11 ( 9)
Cytogenetics scoring
    Favorable 10 (8)
    Intermediate 69 (56)
    Poor 41 (33)
    Missing 4 ( 3)
Transplant-related variables
Graft type
    BM 66 (53)
    PBSC 11 ( 9)
    Single CBU 38 (31)
    Double CBU 9 ( 7)
Donor type
    HLA identical sibling 25 (20)
    ≥ 7/8 HLA matched related 5 ( 4)
    ≥ 7/8 HLA matched unrelated 94 (76)
Recipient CMV
    Negative 55 (44)
    Positive 69 (56)
Conditioning regimen
    Busulfan-based 99 (80)
    TBI-based 16 (13)
    Treosulfan-based 9 ( 7)
GVHD prophylaxis
    Post-HSCT Cyclophosphamide 2 ( 2)
    CNI + mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) 55 (44)
    CNI + methotrexate (MTX) 59 (48)
    CNI alone or with other 8( 6)
Serotherapy
    Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) + alemtuzumab 2 ( 2)
    ATG alone 56 (45)
    alemtuzumab alone 3 ( 2)
    None 63 (51)