Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40514012›Full record

ArticleTransplantation and cellular therapy2025

An ASTCT, CIBMTR, EBMT, and APBMT Consensus Statement Defining Response Criteria for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Associated Thrombotic Microangiopathy (TA-TMA) Directed Therapy.

Michelle L Schoettler, Eleni Gavriilaki, Enric Carreras, Cho Bo-Kyoung, Christopher E Dandoy, Vincent T Ho, Sonata Jodele, Ivan Moiseev, Isabella Sánchez-Ortega, Alok Srivastava and 11 more

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Transplantation and cellular therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

Michelle L SchoettlerAflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Eleni GavriilakiHematology Department, G Papanikoloaou Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Enric CarrerasDepartment of Hematology, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain.
Cho Bo-KyoungDepartment of Internal Medicine, Catholic Blood and Marrow Transplantation Center, Seoul, Korea.
Christopher E DandoyDivision of Bone Marrow Transplantation and Immune Deficiency, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Vincent T HoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Division of Hematologic Malignancies, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Sonata JodeleDivision of Bone Marrow Transplantation and Immune Deficiency, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Ivan MoiseevRM Gorbacheva Research Institute, Pavlov University, Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation.
Isabella Sánchez-OrtegaEuropean Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) Executive Office, Barcelona, Spain.
Alok SrivastavaDepartment of Haematology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Yoshiko AtsutaJapanese Data Center for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, Nagoya, Japan.
Paul A CarpenterClinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington State.
John KorethDepartment of Medical Oncology, Division of Hematologic Malignancies, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Nicolaus KrögerDivision of Hematology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Per LjungmanDepartment of Cellular Therapy and Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kristen PageCenter for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Division of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology/Blood and Marrow Transplant, Department of Pediatrics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Uday PopatDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation & Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Bronwen E ShawCenter for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Ana Maria SuredaClinical Hematology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia-Hospitalet, Barcelona, Spain.
Robert SoifferDepartment of Medical Oncology, Division of Hematologic Malignancies, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Sumithira VasuDivision of Hematology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Electronic address: Sumithira.Vasu@osumc.edu.

Funding

Data Resource for Analyzing Blood &Marrow TransplantsU24CA076518 · NCI · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI Amy M Moskop, Bronwen Shaw · 1998 to 2026
$105.2M
Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) associated MODS after stem cell transplantationR01HD093773 · NICHD · CINCINNATI CHILDRENS HOSP MED CTR · PI JODELE, SONATA · 2018 to 2021
$2.8M
NCI NIH HHS U24 CA076518NIAID NIH HHS L40 AI140344NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD093773
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransplant associated thrombotic microangiopathy (TA-TMA) confers significant morbidity and mortality in hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. The safety and efficacy of multiple TA-TMA directed therapeutic agents are being tested in ongoing clinical trials. In the absence of approved drugs, several treatments are used off-label. Response definitions to TA-TMA directed therapy from retrospective studies and ongoing interventional clinical trials vary widely, limiting cross study comparisons. An expert panel from multiple international blood and marrow transplant societies (ASTCT, CIBMTR, EBMT, APBMT) who initially convened to harmonize diagnostic and risk stratification criteria for TA-TMA extended its mandate to review response criteria.

objectiveOur objective was to propose clinically meaningful response criteria for TA-TMA directed therapy to enhance consistent evaluation of therapeutic agents in clinical practice, interventional trials, and registry studies.

methodsAfter a relevant literature review, the Delphi method was used to achieve consensus on proposed response criteria.

resultsThe panel focused on the 3 key concepts. First, due to ongoing concurrent co-morbidities and severity of illness, the complete resolution of TA-TMA manifestations may be difficult to achieve immediately after initiating treatment, making the definition of clinically meaningful partial responses essential to assess early efficacy of TA-TMA-directed therapies. Second, because hematologic manifestations may resolve faster than organ damage, we suggest assessing hematologic/biochemical and organ manifestations independently, in addition to having an overall response assessment. Finally, using the previously established diagnostic criteria as a framework, we propose objective response definitions for each TA-TMA criterion and organ manifestation. While consensus was achieved on response definitions, due to the lack of evidence, there was no agreement on standardized time points for assessing response or when to consider alternative therapies for patients unresponsive to initial treatments. Hematologic and biochemical response assessments include anemia and thrombocytopenia, with criteria accounting for transfusion dependence or independence at the time of treatment, schistocytes, lactate dehydrogenase, and soluble C5b-9. Patients with other established etiologies of cytopenias (i.e. poor graft function or relapsed hematologic malignancy) should be considered unevaluable for hematologic response. Responses for involved organ manifestations were also proposed. In an overall assessment, the best overall response is limited by the lowest hematologic/biochemical or organ response. NR of either hematologic/biochemical or organ is considered an overall NR.

conclusionThe consensus response criteria proposed by this expert panel are a step towards standardizing the assessment of treatment responses of TA-TMA directed agents for future studies and interventional clinical trials. Adoption of these criteria will enhance consistency of response assessment and facilitate the comparison of TA-TMA treatments. Since achieving an early overall CR may be challenging/protracted in patients with organ injury; establishment of criteria for clinically meaningful PR is important and may be a more useful early endpoint in studies. Given the complexity of these patients and assessment of response, these definitions may need be revised in the future after application in large cohorts diverse in age, HCT approaches, and interventional agents.

Indexed as

Hematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationThrombotic MicroangiopathiesHumansHematopoietic cell transplant associated thrombotic microangiopathy (TA-TMA)Organ dysfunctionresponse criteriaSoluble C5b-9

Identifiers

PMID40514012
PMCPMC12718118

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.