Adjusting diffusing capacity for anemia in patients undergoing allogeneic HCT: a comparison of two methodologies

Hemang Yadav; Mehrdad Hefazi Torghabeh; Sumedh S Hoskote; Kelly M Pennington; Kaiser G Lim; Paul D Scanlon; Alexander S Niven; William J Hogan

doi:10.1016/j.retram.2023.103432

Adjusting diffusing capacity for anemia in patients undergoing allogeneic HCT: a comparison of two methodologies

Curr Res Transl Med. 2023 Nov 19;72(2):103432. doi: 10.1016/j.retram.2023.103432. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Hemang Yadav¹, Mehrdad Hefazi Torghabeh², Sumedh S Hoskote³, Kelly M Pennington⁴, Kaiser G Lim³, Paul D Scanlon³, Alexander S Niven³, William J Hogan²

Affiliations

¹ Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Pulmonary Function Laboratory, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States. Electronic address: yadav.hemang@mayo.edu.
² Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, William J. von Liebig Center for Transplantation and Clinical Regeneration, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States.
³ Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Pulmonary Function Laboratory, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States.
⁴ Division of Hematology, William J. von Liebig Center for Transplantation and Clinical Regeneration, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States.

PMID: 38244276
DOI: 10.1016/j.retram.2023.103432

Abstract

Background: Diffusing capacity (DLCO) measurements are affected by hemoglobin. Two adjustment equations are used: Cotes (recommended by ATS/ERS) and Dinakara (used in the hematopoietic stem cell transplantation comorbidity index [HCT-CI]). It is unknown how these methods compare, and which is better from a prognostication standpoint.

Study design: This is a retrospective cohort of 1273 adult patients who underwent allogeneic HCT, completed a pre-transplant DLCO and had a concurrent hemoglobin measurement. Non-relapse mortality was measured using competing risk analysis.

Results: Patients had normal spirometry (FEV₁ 99.7% [IQR: 89.4-109.8%; FVC 100.1% [IQR: 91.0-109.6%] predicted), left ventricular ejection fraction (57.2[6.7]%) and right ventricular systolic pressure (30.1[7.0] mmHg). Cotes-DLCO was 85.6% (IQR: 76.5-95.7%) and Dinakara-DLCO was 103.6% (IQR: 90.7-117.2%) predicted. For anemic patients (Hb<10g/dL), Cotes-DLCO was 84.2% (IQR: 73.9-94.1%) while Dinakara-DLCO 111.0% (97.3-124.7%) predicted. Cotes-DLCO increased HCT-CI score for 323 (25.4%) and decreased for 4 (0.3%) patients. Cotes-DLCO was superior for predicting non-relapse mortality: for both mild (66-80% predicted, HR 1.55 [95%CI: 1.26-1.92, p < 0.001]) and moderate (<65% predicted, HR 2.11 [95%CI: 1.55-2.87, p<0.001]) impairment. In contrast, for Dinakara-DLCO, only mild impairment (HR 1.69 [95%CI 1.26-2.27, p < 0.001]) was associated with lower survival while moderate impairment was not (HR 1.44 [95%CI: 0.64-3.21, p = 0.4]). In multivariable analyses, after adjusting for demographics, hematologic variables, cardiac function and FEV₁, Cotes-DLCO was predictive of overall survival at 1-year (OR 0.98 [95%CI: 0.97-1.00], p = 0.01), but Dinakara-DLCO was not (OR 1.00 [95%CI: 0.98-1.00], p = 0.20).

Conclusion: The ERS/ATS recommended Cotes method likely underestimates DLCO in patients with anemia, whereas the Dinakara (used in the HCT-CI score) overestimates DLCO. The Cotes method is superior to the Dinakara method score in predicting overall survival and relapse-free survival in patients undergoing allogeneic HCT.

Keywords: Anemia; Bone marrow transplant; DLCO; Diffusing capacity; HCT.