HEALTH PROFESSIONAL · SOURCE READING
Role of GVHD/GVL in ALL and immune modulation after transplant to prevent relapse
Source: Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment (PDQ®)–Health Professional Version, National Cancer Institute.
Source updated: April 21, 2025 · Captured 2026-09-09.
Selected source text with whitespace normalised. This Triangle page is not an NCI PDQ summary.
Most studies of pediatric and young adult patients that address this issue suggest an effect of both acute and chronic GVHD in decreasing relapse.[115,134-137]
In a COG trial of transplant for children with ALL, grades I to III acute GVHD were associated with lower relapse risk (HR, 0.4; P = .04) and better EFS (multivariate analysis, HR, 0.5; P = .02). Any effect of grade IV acute GVHD in decreasing relapse risk was obscured by a marked increase in transplant-related mortality (HR, 6.4; P = .003), while grades I to III acute GVHD had no statistically detectable effect on transplant-related mortality (HR, 0.6; P = .42).[136]
Source links and citations
In a multivariate model, both pretransplant MRD and acute GVHD were independent predictors of relapse, with the lowest risk of relapse observed in patients with both low pretransplant MRD and grades I to III acute GVHD.[112] For patients who did not develop acute GVHD by day 55 post-HSCT, nearly all relapses occurred between days 100 and 400 post-HSCT.
Source links and citations
To harness this GVL effect, a number of approaches to prevent relapse after transplant have been studied, including withdrawal of immune suppression or donor lymphocyte infusion and targeted immunotherapies, such as monoclonal antibodies and natural killer cell therapy.[138,139] Trials in Europe and the United States have shown that patients defined as having a high risk of relapse based on increasing recipient chimerism (i.e., increased percentage of recipient DNA markers) can successfully undergo withdrawal of immune suppression without excessive toxicity.[140,141]
One study showed that in 46 patients with increasing recipient chimerism, the 31 patients who underwent immune suppression withdrawal, donor lymphocyte infusion, or both therapies had a 3-year EFS rate of 37% versus 0% in the nonintervention group (P < .001).[142]
Source links and citations
Other studies have shown better-than-expected rates of survival of pre-HSCT, MRD-positive patients when tapering of immunosuppression medication has occurred for MRD detected after HSCT.[143]
Source links and citations
A large international study showed a marked decrease in relapse in patients who experienced MRD-positive disease after HSCT and developed acute GHVD (HR, 0.29; P < .001), resulting in improved EFS (HR, 2.9; P = .01). Acute GVHD significantly decreased relapse and improved EFS in both MRD-positive and MRD-negative patients. Chronic GVHD was also associated with less relapse in both MRD-positive and MRD-negative patients.[92]
Source links and citations
Publication references
Read the original reference and check its publication notices.
- PubMed 12399966 · Original source
- PubMed 12621478 · Original source
- PubMed 15117992 · Original source
- PubMed 18955982 · Original source
- PubMed 19147081 · Original source
- PubMed 20535148 · Original source
- PubMed 24479958 · Original source
- PubMed 24497539 · Original source
- PubMed 25522886 · Original source
- PubMed 25961775 · Original source
- PubMed 30808685 · Original source
- PubMed 31714961 · Original source
Preserved source evidence · Not medical advice
Triangle