• THE EBMT HANDBOOK 2008REVISED EDITION 148 2.1.Testingofdonatedbloodforinfectiousdiseasemarkers(IDM) Anumberofmicrobialagentsmaybetransmittedbybloodtransfusion.
• A revised transmittal for HUD Handbook 4350.3, REV-1, Change 4 dated Nov 27 was posted to HUDCLIPS on Dec 10. The transmittal provides a list of changes included in Change 4 including those changes incorporated in this new release, with a slightly delayed implementation timeframe.

1. Nfpa 70e Handbook 2012
2. California Commercial Drivers Handbook 2012
3. Florida Driver Handbook 2012 Answers

Recommendations from the EBMT auto-HSCT HLA matched Sib Well-matched URD/1 Ag mm Sib mm URD/>1 Ag mm Sib. THEEBMTHANDBOOK2012 EDITION 432. Handbook on Multiple Myeloma - Second Edition. An online, interactive handbook recently published by Springer Healthcare in partnership with the European School of Haematology. ESH-EBMT Handbook on Haemopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (2012) 2013/11/28. By J.Apperley, E. Validation of the EBMT Risk Score for South Brazilian Patients Submitted to Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation. The EBMT Handbook: Hematopoietic Stem Cell. Rezvani K, Kanfer EJ, Marin D, et al. EBMT risk score predicts outcome of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients who have failed a previous. COR HANDBOOK March 22, 2012 Director, Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy. This edition of the DoD Contracting Officer’s Representative Handbook provides basic. The handbook is comprehensive in nature to provide as much information as possible for.

Abstract

Background. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is still associated with a high transplant-related mortality rate. In 2009, the EBMT risk score was validated as a simple tool to predict the outcome after allogeneic HSCT for acquired hematological disorders. Objectives. The aim of this study was to validate the applicability of the EBMT risk score for allogeneic HSCT on South Brazilian patients. Methods. A retrospective observational study was performed based on patients' records and data base at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, including all allogeneic transplants for malignant and severe aplastic anemia from 1994 to 2010. Patients were categorized according to EBMT risk score and overall survival (OS). Nonrelapse mortality (NRM) and relapse rate (RR) were analyzed. Results. There were 278 evaluable patients. OS, NRM, and RR at five years median followup were 48.7%, 40.7%, and 30.7%, respectively. The OS was 81.8% for risk score 0 and 0% for score 6 (P < 0.001), and NRM was 13.6% and 80% for risk scores 0 and 6, respectively (P = 0.001). Conclusion. The EBMT risk score can be utilized as a tool for clinical decision making before allogeneic HSCT for malignant hematological diseases and severe aplastic anemia at a single center in Brazil.

1. Introduction

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is a potentially curative therapy for a variety of malignant and nonmalignant hematological disorders [, ]. Since the first transplant, performed in 1939 [], this procedure has evolved with advances in conditioning, HLA compatibility techniques, supportive care, management of complications, and expanding stem cells sources [, –]. As a result, indications for transplant and the pool of eligible patients have increased, notably allowing inclusion of elderly recipients [] and increasing the annual number of unrelated HSCT, now exceeding 10.000 worldwide [].

Allogeneic HSCT remains, however, associated with a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. This procedure can induce damage of various organs and tissues, from subclinical changes to life-threatening conditions [, , ], justifying the development of scores for the assessment of HSCT risk in a particular patient. On the other hand, nontransplant treatment strategies [14–] have improved in recent years, particularly for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML).

In 1998, the EBMT (European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation) validated a simple risk score for patients submitted to allogeneic HSCT for CML based on five risk factors: age of recipient, disease stage, time interval from diagnosis to transplantation, donor type, and donor-recipient gender combination []. It is interesting to note that De Souza et al. [] validated the EBMT score in a population of 1084 Brazilian CML patients. Later, in a retrospective analysis, the EBMT extended the score utility to a broad range of acquired hematological disorders, improving transplant risk assessment in general []. The latter was later tested and modified for different diseases and clinical situations [–].

The aim of this study was to validate the applicability of the EBMT risk score for allogeneic HSCT on South Brazilian patients with acquired hematological disorders from a single center at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil.

2. Patients and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Database

A retrospective observational study was performed based on the review of patients' charts and database at the Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation Department of Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), Brazil. This data holds information on 293 patients submitted to allogeneic HSCT performed between 1994 and 2010. Except for syngeneic donor transplants and HSCT performed for nonmalignant diseases other than aplastic anemia, all HLA-identical sibling and unrelated donor transplants were included.

2.2. Definitions of Risk Score and Endpoints

This analysis utilizes the original EBMT (European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation) risk score as reported and later adapted by Gratwohl et al. [, ], with five pretransplant risk factors: age of the patient, disease stage, time from diagnosis to transplant, donor type, and donor-recipient gender combination. The total risk score for an individual patient is the sum of points given to each variable, which can range from 0 to 7 points. Risk factors were distributed as age of recipient (0 for <20 years, 1 for 20–40 years, and 2 for >40 years); donor type (0 for HLA-identical sibling donor and 1 for unrelated donor); gender match (0 for all others and 1 for male recipient/female donor); time from diagnosis to transplantation (0 for <12 months and 1 for >12 months). Disease stage was categorized as early stage (0 point) including acute leukemia transplanted in first complete remission (CR), myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) transplanted either untreated or in first CR, CML in first chronic phase, and lymphoproliferative disorders and multiple myeloma (MM) in first CR. Intermediate stage (1 point) includes acute leukemia in second CR, CML in all other stages except chronic phase and blast crisis, MDS in second CR or in partial remission, and lymphoproliferative disorders and MM in second CR, partial remission, or stable disease. Late stage disease (2 points) includes acute leukemia in all other disease stages, CML in blast crisis, MDS, lymphoproliferative disorders, and MM in all other stages than those previously defined. Disease stage in patients with severe aplastic anemia (SAA) was always considered as early stage (0 point). Donor and recipient CMV serologic status was also analyzed in our population.

Overall survival (OS), nonrelapse mortality (NRM), and relapse rate (RR) were the three endpoints analyzed in this study. Overall survival was defined as the probability of survival from transplant to death from any cause, with surviving patients censored at the last followup. NRM was defined as the probability of dying due to any cause other than disease recurrence and RR as the probability of disease recurrence [15].

2.3. Statistical Analysis

The calculations were done by SPSS v.18.0, and each endpoint was analyzed separately. Quantitative variables are described by median and range and categorical variables by frequencies and percentages. 95% confidence intervals were presented. Overall survival was estimated from the time of transplant using Kaplan-Meier curve method. NRM and relapse were calculated using cumulative incidence estimates. For each endpoint and each studied disease, a Cox regression model with a proportional hazards analysis was applied using the five risk factors. The predictive power of the EBMT risk score was calculated for total population and for each disease by computing the receiver operating characteristics area under the curve (ROC AUC) for each endpoint.

2.4. Ethical Aspects

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of HCPA under number 09-607 and the data was analyzed anonymously according to Declaration of Helsinki for human studies.

3. Results

3.1. Patient Population

In total, 293 patients submitted to allogeneic HSCT were included. Of those, 16 patients were not eligible: eleven patients had nonmalignant disorders other than SAA and in 5 the information was not available.

Nightmare the world ruler rar. 'The FOOL' 0:47 11. ' Alumina ( アルミナ)' 5:05 12.

From the 278 evaluable patients 156 were male (56%), with a median age of 32 years, ranging from 1 to 57 years. Fifty-nine patients had acute myeloid leukemia (AML), 48 ALL, 16 MDS, 76 CML, 27 lymphoproliferative disorders, 1 MM, and 51 SAA. Most procedures (238) were performed with HLA-identical sibling and 40 with HLA-matched and mismatched unrelated donors. Bone marrow was the stem-cell source in 220, peripheral blood in 52, and cord blood in 6 patients. Of the entire group of patients, 241 were submitted to myeloablative and 37 to reduced intensity conditioning regimens. Most transplants were performed at early disease stage (175 patients, 62.9%) and with more than 12 months from diagnosis. The sums of risk score points were 2 and 3 for the majority of patients (138 patients, 49.6%). No recipient had scored 7. The population characteristics are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1

AML: acute myeloid leukemia; ALL: acute lymphoblastic leukemia; CML: chronic myeloid leukemia; MDS: myelodysplastic syndrome; MM: multiple myeloma; LD: lymphoproliferative disorders; SAA: severe aplastic anemia; BM: bone marrow; PBSC: peripheral blood stem cell; CB: cord blood; HLA IS: human leukocyte antigen identical sibling; Gender com: gender combination between donor and recipient; DF/RM: donor female/recipient male; CMV: cytomegalovirus; neg: negative; pos: positive.

3.2. Overall Survival

The cumulative OS for the entire population was 48.7% at five years (95% confidence interval, 42.5%–54.9%) and 43.9% (95% CI, 37.1%–50.7%) at ten years. Median follow-up for surviving patients was 6.39 years, ranging from 58 days to 15 years (Figure 1).

Overall survival.

There was a significant relation between the sum of risk score points and survival. Overall survival in five years decreases significantly from 81.8% on risk score 0 to 0% on score 6 (P < 0.001). Risk score 0 had a statistical difference when compared with scores 3, 4, 5, and 6 (P = 0.034; 0.003; 0.003; and <0.001, resp.). A significant difference was also observed between score 1 when compared to scores 4, 5, and 6, and scores 3 and 4 to score 6 (P = 0.010; 0.018; and 0.005, resp.) (Figure 2).

Nfpa 70e Handbook 2012

Overall survival on risk score.

Some risk factors had a significant impact on survival for different diseases. For our total population, disease stage, time interval between disease diagnosis and HSCT, and donor type were the risk factors with significant impact on overall survival. Age, disease stage, and gender combination had significant impact only for AML, and donor type was statistically significant for AML and CML. The predictive power of the score for all diseases, analyzed by ROC AUC, was 0.667, ranging from 0.590 for SAA to 0.802 for AML. Proportional hazards were not performed to MDS, MM, and lymphoproliferative disorders because of the small number of patients. Hazard ratio on overall survival for all patients and for each disease is shown in Table 2.

Table 2

Impact of pretransplant risk factors on overall survival.

AML: acute myeloid leukemia; ALL: acute lymphoblastic leukemia; CML: chronic myeloid leukemia; HLA IS: human leukocyte antigen identical sibling; DF/RM: donor female/recipient male; ROC AUC: receiver operating characteristics area under the curve.

3.3. Nonrelapse Mortality

Cumulative nonrelapse mortality was 40.7% at five years (95% CI, 34.5%–46.9%) and 44.6% (95% CI, 37.6%–51.6%) at ten years (Figure 3). The NRM increased from 13.6% for risk score 0 to 80% for score 6 (P = 0.001). Risk score 0 was statistically different to scores 2, 3, 5, and 6 (P = 0.044; 0.034; 0.004; and 0.001, resp.), as score 1 to score 6 (P = 0.029) (Figure 4). Evaluating risk factors for NRM, advance disease stage (HR 3.8 (1.3–11.0)), and gender combination (HR 2.6 (1.1–6.4)) had significant difference for AML and donor type (HR 4.1 (1.7–10.2)) for CML. The predictive power for all diseases was 0.59, ranging from 0.55 for ALL to 0.77 for AML.

Nonrelapse mortality.

Nonrelapse mortality on risk score.

3.4. Relapse Rate

The RR of the entire population was 30.7% at five years (95% CI, 23.3%–38.1%) and 32.4% at ten years (95% CI, 24.4%–40.4%). For relapse, advanced disease stage had significant impact for ALL (HR 9.6 (2.6–36.0)), AML (HR 7.3 (2.2–24.0)), and CML (HR 5.1 (1.1–24.2)) and gender combination for ALL (HR 3.5 (1.2–10.1)). The predictive power for all diseases was 0.630, ranging from 0.47 for CML to 0.76 for ALL. Deaths from relapse were 22.1% at five years (95% CI, 15.5%–28.7%) and 28.5% at ten years (95% CI, 20.5%–36.5%) (Figure 5). The relation between relapse rate and prognostic scoring system was not statistically significant.

Deaths from relapse.

3.5. CMV Serologic Status

CMV serologic status was positive in 238 (86.5%) patients and there was no significant difference on overall survival between seropositive and seronegative recipients or between donor/recipient combinations of CMV serology (Table 1).

4. Discussion

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is a treatment modality able to cure many hematological disorders, but morbimortality rates remain high [, , ]. Efforts have been made trying to integrate pretransplant clinical variables into a single score in order to predict outcomes in HSCT recipients [–]. The aim of our study was to validate the 2009 EBMT risk score [] in a single Brazilian center for all acquired hematological disorders.

Of the 278 patients, with a median age of 32 years, the majority (86.5%) had a positive serologic status for CMV, precluding statistical analysis, and were submitted to a matched-related, myeloablative allogeneic HSCT for an early stage disease. The median time interval from diagnosis to transplant was over 12 months, and the stem cell source more frequently used was bone marrow. OS, NRM, and death from relapse at five years were 48.7%, 40.7%, and 22.1%, respectively (Figures ​(Figures1,1, ​,3,3, and ​and5).5). Although in a much smaller and different ethnic population of patients, precluding a strait forward comparison, our data differs from Gratwohl et al. [] in time interval to transplant since the majority of the European patients were transplanted less than 12 months after diagnosis. The extended time to transplant observed in our population was probably due to a delay in referral to HSCT as previously shown in a Brazilian population [].

Overall, the EBMT risk score has proved to be a reasonable tool to predict OS at our center. As shown by the EBMT group, patients with lower risk scores had a better OS after HSCT, and advanced disease stage, longer time interval from diagnosis to transplant, and unrelated donor were powerful predictors of worse survival in our population.

The Indian Contract Act, 1872 I Of the Communication, Acceptance and Revocation of Proposals II Of Contracts, Voidable Contracts and Void Agreements III Of Contingent Contracts IV Of the Performance of Contracts V Of Certain Relations Resembling Those Created by Contract VI Of the Consequences of Breach of Contract VIII Of Indemnity and Guarantee IX Of Bailment X Agency 2. Legal aspects of business akhileshwar pathak pdf free free. Table of Contents: Preface Table of Cases 1. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Part I: Arbitration I General Provisions II Arbitration Agreement III Composition of Arbitral Tribunal IV Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunals V Conduct of Arbitral Proceedings VI Making of Arbitral Award and Termination of Proceedings VII Recourse against Arbitral Award VIII Finality and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards IX Appeals X Miscellaneous Part II: Enforcement of Certain Foreign Awards I New York Convention Awards II Geneva Convention Awards Part III: Conciliation Part IV: Supplementary Provisions 3. The book is primarily meant for the undergraduate and postgraduate students of law, management and the undergraduate students of commerce. Besides, students pursuing professional courses such as Company Secretaryship (CS), CA and ICWA would also find the book quite useful.

As for the stronger predictive value for AML (AUC: 0.802), observed in our group of patients, we could argue that, besides size sample, ours was a positively selected group of AML patients since the majority of patients were transplanted in first remission in a longer time interval to transplant. It is reasonable to speculate that for such long disease-free survival before transplant, patients were selected by attending a better remission with corresponding better prognosis []. As can be noted (Table 2), time interval to transplant was not significant for this as well as for any group of our patients. Recently, a modified EBMT risk score was proposed and validated to ALL and AML patients [, ], omitting time from diagnosis to transplantation since this parameter could be more susceptible to multiple sources of bias [, ], including a strong correlation with disease stage []. In addition, it is of note that most ALL patients in first CR were at high risk (Ph+ ALL and other cytogenetic unfavorable leukemias) (data not shown), whereas our CML patients were transplanted after over 12 months in first chronic phase which has been shown, as itself, to be predictive of a worse outcome []. These findings could explain why the predicted risk value was weaker, although in accordance to the EBMT findings [], compared to our group of probably selected AML patients.

Finally, NRM and RR were also associated with risk scores categories but with a poorer predictive power than overall survival. Confirming the international literature [], advanced disease stage was an independent risk factor associated with increased relapse rate in all malignancies (AML, ALL, and CML) evaluated in our study. Lymphoproliferative disorders, MDS, and MM had no sufficient number of patients to allow a reliable analysis. Although not considered as a risk factor at the EBMT score system, CMV serologic status, recognized as a negative risk factor for NRM and OS after HSCT [], could not be evaluated in our sample of patients due to the very high incidence observed of CMV positivity.

In conclusion, here we demonstrated that the EBMT score can be utilized as a tool for clinical decision making for malignant and nonmalignant hematological disorders in a single center in Brazil. It should be noted that been retrospective and studying a consecutive cohort of patients from 1994 to 2010, its limitation is to have included mostly young and good risk patients. It will be necessary to test this predictive model prospectively since the present day population has a larger proportion of patients with more resistant diseases partially related to the use of newer agents or more extensive pretreatment with conventional drug combinations.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Acknowledgment

The study received financial support from the Research and Event Incentive Fund of Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (FIPE-HCPA).

References

• About this Journal ·

The Presence of Anti-HLA Antibodies before and after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cells Transplantation from HLA-Mismatched Unrelated Donors

¹Department of Hematology and BMT, Medical University of Silesia, Dabrowskiego 25, 40-032 Katowice, Poland
²HLA and Immunogenetics Laboratory, Regional Blood Center, Raciborska 15, 40-074 Katowice, Poland
³Lower Silesian Center for Cellular Transplantation with National Bone Marrow Donor Registry, Grabiszynska 105, 53-439 Wroclaw, Poland

Received 26 June 2012; Revised 17 September 2012; Accepted 18 September 2012

Academic Editor: Bronwen Shaw

California Commercial Drivers Handbook 2012

Copyright © 2012 Anna Koclega et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

Florida Driver Handbook 2012 Answers

1. J. Apperley, E. Carreras, E. Gluckman, and T. Masszi, Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation-The EBMT Handbook, 6th edition, 2012.
2. F. Legrand and J. Dausset, “Serological evidence of the existence of several antigenic determinants (or factors) on the HLA-A gene products,” in Histocompatibility Testing 1972, J. Dausset and J. Colombani, Eds., Munksgaard, Copenhagen, Denmark, 1973.View at Google Scholar
3. G. E. Rodey and T. C. Fuller, “Public epitopes and the antigenic structure of the HLA molecules,” Critical reviews in immunology, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 229–267, 1987.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
4. B. D. Schwartz, L. K. Luehrman, and G. E. Rodey, “Public antigenic determinant on a family of HLA-B molecules. Basis for cross-reactivity and a possible link with disease predisposition,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 938–947, 1979.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
5. R. A. Rhoades and R. G. Pflanzer, Human Physiology, Thomson Learning, Stockholm, Sweden, 4th edition, 2002.
6. J. Charles, Immunobiology, Garland Publishing, New York, NY, USA, 5th edition, 2001.
7. L. J. Fanning, A. M. Connor, and G. E. Wu, “Development of the immunoglobulin repertoire,” Clinical Immunology and Immunopathology, vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 1996.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
8. P. Peter, The Immune System, Garland Science, New York, NY, USA, 2nd edition, 2005.
9. Y. Bergman and H. Cedar, “A stepwise epigenetic process controls immunoglobulin allelic exclusion,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 753–761, 2004.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
10. M. Or-Guil, N. Wittenbrink, A. A. Weiser, and J. Schuchhardt, “Recirculation of germinal center B cells: a multilevel selection strategy for antibody maturation,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 216, no. 1, pp. 130–141, 2007.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
11. N. El-Awar, P. I. Terasaki, A. Nguyen et al., “Epitopes of human leukocyte antigen class I antibodies found in sera of normal healthy males and cord blood,” Human Immunology, vol. 70, no. 10, pp. 844–853, 2009.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
12. L. E. Morales-Buenrostro, P. I. Terasaki, L. A. Marino-Vázquez, J. H. Lee, N. El-Awar, and J. Alberú, “Natural human leukocyte antigen antibodies found in nonalloimmunized healthy males,” Transplantation, vol. 86, no. 8, pp. 1111–1115, 2008.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
13. W. E. Braun, “Laboratory and clinical management of the highly sensitized organ transplant recipient,” Human Immunology, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 245–260, 1989.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
14. A. Idica, N. Sasaki, S. Hardy, and P. Terasaki, “Unexpected frequencies of HLA antibody specificities present in sera of multitransfused patients.,” Clinical transplants, pp. 139–159, 2006.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
15. E. Hod and J. Schwartz, “Platelet transfusion refractoriness,” British Journal of Haematology, vol. 142, no. 3, pp. 348–360, 2008.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
16. R. A. Middelburg, D. Van Stein, E. Briët, and J. G. Van Der Bom, “The role of donor antibodies in the pathogenesis of transfusion-related acute lung injury: a systematic review,” Transfusion, vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 2167–2176, 2008.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
17. A. Reil, B. Keller-Stanislawski, S. Günay, and J. Bux, “Specificities of leucocyte alloantibodies in transfusion-related acute lung injury and results of leucocyte antibody screening of blood donors,” Vox Sanguinis, vol. 95, no. 4, pp. 313–317, 2008.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
18. E. R. Vasilescu, E. K. Ho, A. I. Colovai et al., “Alloantibodies and the outcome of cadaver kidney allografts,” Human Immunology, vol. 67, no. 8, pp. 597–604, 2006.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
19. A. A. Zachary, L. E. Ratner, J. A. Graziani, D. P. Lucas, N. L. Delaney, and M. S. Leffell, “Characterization of HLA class I specific antibodies by ELISA using solubilized antigen targets: II. Clinical relevance,” Human Immunology, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 236–246, 2001.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
20. F. Kissmeyer-Nielsen, S. Olsen, V. P. Petersen, and O. Fjeldborg, “Hyperacute rejection of kidney allografts, associated with pre-existing humoral antibodies against donor cells.,” The Lancet, vol. 2, no. 7465, pp. 662–665, 1966.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
21. G. M. Williams, D. M. Hume, R. P. Hudson Jr, P. J. Morris, K. Kano, and F. Milgrom, “Hyperacute renal-homograft rejection in man.,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 279, no. 12, pp. 611–618, 1968.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
22. E. Schwartz, T. Lapidot, and D. Gozes, “Abrogation of bone marrow allograft resistance in mice by increased total body irradiation correlates with eradication of host clonable T cells and alloreactive cytotoxic precursors,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 138, no. 2, pp. 460–465, 1987.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
23. D. A. Vallera and B. R. Blazar, “T cell depletion for graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis: a perspective on engraftment in mice and humans,” Transplantation, vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 751–760, 1989.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
24. K. Fleischhauer, N. A. Kernan, R. J. O'Reilly, B. Dupont, and S. Y. Yang, “Bone marrow-allograft rejection by T lymphocytes recognizing a single amino acid difference in HLA-B44,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 323, no. 26, pp. 1818–1822, 1990.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
25. J. Pei, Y. Akatsuka, C. Anasetti et al., “Generation of HLA-C-specific cytotoxic T cells in association with marrow graft rejection: analysis of alloimmunity by T-cell cloning and testing of T-cell-receptor rearrangements,” Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 378–383, 2001.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
26. S. M. Davies, C. Kollman, C. Anasetti et al., “Engraftment and survival after unrelated-donor bone marrow transplantation: a report from the national marrow donor program,” Blood, vol. 96, no. 13, pp. 4096–4102, 2000.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
27. P. Rubinstein, C. Carrier, A. Scaradavou et al., “Outcomes among 562 recipients of placental-blood transplants from unrelated donors,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 339, no. 22, pp. 1565–1577, 1998.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
28. C. Anasetti, K. C. Doney, and R. Storb, “Marrow transplantation for severe aplastic anemia. Long-term outcome in fifty 'untransfused' patients,” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 104, no. 4, pp. 461–466, 1986.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
29. R. P. Warren, R. Storb, P. L. Weiden, P. J. Su, and E. D. Thomas, “Lymphocyte-mediated cytotoxicity and antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity in patients with aplastic anemia: distinguishing transfusion-induced sensitization from possible immune-mediated aplastic anemia.,” Transplantation Proceedings, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 245–247, 1981.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
30. Y. L. Colson, M. J. Schuchert, and S. T. Ildstad, “The abrogation of allosensitization following the induction of mixed allogeneic chimerism,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 165, no. 2, pp. 637–644, 2000.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
31. P. A. Taylor, M. J. Ehrhardt, M. M. Roforth et al., “Preformed antibody, not primed T cells, is the initial and major barrier to bone marrow engraftment in allosensitized recipients,” Blood, vol. 109, no. 3, pp. 1307–1315, 2007.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
32. R. J. Greenwald, G. J. Freeman, and A. H. Sharpe, “The B7 family revisited,” Annual Review of Immunology, vol. 23, pp. 515–548, 2005.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
33. A. Bartholomew, D. Sher, S. Sosler et al., “Stem cell transplantation eliminates alloantibody in a highly sensitized patient,” Transplantation, vol. 72, no. 10, pp. 1653–1655, 2001.View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
34. S. Spellman, R. Bray, S. Rosen-Bronson et al., “The detection of donor-directed, HLA-specific alloantibodies in recipients of unrelated hematopoietic cell transplantation is predictive of graft failure,” Blood, vol. 115, no. 13, pp. 2704–2708, 2010.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
35. S. O. Ciurea, P. F. Thall, X. Wang et al., “Donor-specific anti-HLAAbs and graft failure in matched unrelated donor hematopoietic stem cell transplantation,” Blood, vol. 118, no. 22, pp. 5957–5964, 2011.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
36. M. Takanashi, Y. Atsuta, K. Fujiwara et al., “The impact of anti-HLA antibodies on unrelated cord blood transplantations,” Blood, vol. 116, no. 15, pp. 2839–2846, 2010.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
37. C. Cutler, H. T. Kim, L. Sun et al., “Donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies predict outcome in double umbilical cord blood transplantation,” Blood, vol. 118, no. 25, pp. 6691–6697, 2011.View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar