Table 7.
Trials comparing HSCT with haploidentical donor and matched sibling donor
| References | Diagnosis | aGVHD II-IV | cGvHD | CIR | LFS or GRFS | OS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chang et al. [88] |
Adult FCM MRD + AML HID vs. MSD |
HID: 28–36% MSD: 5–7% |
HID: 70–73% MSD: 41–66% |
19 vs. 55%, p < 0.001 | 74 vs. 33%, p < 0.001 | 83 vs. 38%, p = 0.001 |
| Yu et al. [91] |
Adult High-risk AML CR1 HID vs. MSD |
HID: 40% MSD: 46% |
HID: 39% MSD: 51% |
14 vs. 24%, p = 0.101 |
LFS 71 vs. 66%, p = 0.579 GRFS 64 vs. 43%; p = 0.035 |
72 vs. 68%, p = 0.687 |
| Zheng et al. [92] |
Children High-risk AML CR1 HID vs. MSD |
HID: 35% MSD: 13% |
HID: 35% MSD: 14% |
50.0 vs. 9.2%, p = 0.001 | 81.2 vs. 50.0%, p = 0.021 | 81.5 vs. 68.8%; p = 0.196 |
| Guo et al. [103] |
MRD + AML-ETO HID vs. MSD |
Not report | Not report | 14 vs. 25%; p = 0.036 | 68 vs. 48%;p = 0.026 | 70 vs. 50%; p = 0.062 |
| Chang et al. [89] |
Adult FCM MRD + ALL HID vs. MSD |
HID: 21% MSD:23% |
HID: 41% MSD: 48% |
23 vs. 47%, p = 0.006 | 65 vs. 43%, p = 0.023 | 68 vs. 46%, p = 0.039 |
| Li et al. [90] |
Adult MRD + Ph + ALL HID vs. MSD |
HID: 22.0% MSD:23.8% |
HID: 38.5% MSD: 38.3% |
14.8 vs. 56.4%, p = 0.021 | 77.7 vs. 35.9%, p = 0.036 | 80.5 vs. 35.9%, p = 0.027 |
| Gao et al. [26] |
Adult and children Ph + ALL HID vs. MSD |
HID:51.1% MSD:25.7% |
HID:48.9% MSD:25.7% |
19.1 vs 44.8%, p = 0.036 | 59.5 vs 45.7%, p = 0.118 | 63.8 vs 62.6%, p = 0.743 |
| Wang et al. [102] | Elderly AL HID with young donor vs. MSD |
HID: 35% MSD:26% |
HID: 24% MSD: 37% |
6 vs. 17%; p = 0.066 | 85 vs. 56%; p = 0.001 | 85 vs. 58%; p = 0.003 |
AML, acute myeloid leukemia; ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; aGVHD, acute graft-versus-host-disease; CT, Chemotherapy; cGVHD, chronic graft-versus-host-disease;
FCM, multiparameter flow cytometry; HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; HID, haploidentical donor; LFS, leukemia-free survival; MSD, matched sibling donor; MRD, minimal (or measurable) residual disease