Skip to main content
letter
. 2022 Jun 11;57(9):1458–1460. doi: 10.1038/s41409-022-01733-3

Table 1.

Summary results of the survey.

Center responses N (%)
Total centers responding 72 (17.0)
Data registration
Use own registry outside of EBMT 65 (90.3)
Use of NIH criteria 68 (94.4)
Routinely use NIH criteria for diagnosis and severity grading outside of clinical trialsa
 NIH2005 13 (19.1)
 NIH2014 6 (8.8)
 Both 49 (72.1)
Using NIH response criteria outside clinical trials 37 (51.4)
Use of Biomarkers
Confirming skin, ocular and oral mucosa cGvHD by histopathology:
 Rarely (<10%) 26 (36.1)
 Sometimes (10–39%) 16 (22.2)
 Often (40–74%) 17 (23.6)
 Routinely (>75%) 7 (9.7)
Use of specific biomarkers 5 (6.9)
Collecting and storing patient samplesa 22 (30.6)
 At calendar-driven time points 15
 At the onset of cGvHD 10
 During the treatment of cGvHD 7
 Before transplantation 3
Use of PROs 22 (30.6)
Setting of use of PROsa:
 As integral part of the clinical evaluation 20
 As part of the outcome analysis 13
 As monitoring of response to treatment 13
 For referral to specialists 9
Most common reasons for not using PROsa:
 Resource constraints 36
 Time constraints 33
 Not available in the required language 14
 Not familiar with interpretation of PRO data 7
 Additional burden for the patients 5
Types of questionnaires useda
 Standardized 18
 Questionnaires developed for specific clinic or research purposes 11
Types of standardized questionnaires useda:
 FACT-BMT 6
 Lee chronic GvHD symptom scale 6
 NIH Form B 5
 SF-36 4
 EORTC QLQ-C30 3
 EQ5D 3
 Other 10
Use of cell-based cGvHD therapiesa 39 (54.2)
 MSCs 27
 ECP closed system 24
 ECP open system 19
 Tregs 5

PRO patient reported outcomes, MSC mesenchymal stromal cells, ECP extracorporeal photopheresis, Tregs regulatory T cells.

aDenotes that several answers were possible.