Abstract
When designing a study for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), many choices must be made, including conditioning regimen, stem cell source, and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prevention method. For each of these, there are a growing number of options, which can be combined into a bewildering number of possible HSCT protocols. To properly interpret the results of a given strategy and compare them with others, it is essential that there be agreement on the definitions and estimation methods of HSCT endpoints. We report a survey of the recent HSCT literature that confirms the heterogeneity of endpoint definitions and estimation methods used. Unfortunately, this heterogeneity may lead to significant biases in the estimates of key endpoints, including nonrelapse mortality, relapse, GVHD, or engraftment. This can preclude adequate comparisons among studies, even though such comparisons are the major tool with which to improve HSCT outcome. In the context of our survey, we discuss some of the statistical issues that arise when dealing with HSCT endpoints and the ramifications of the choice of endpoint definition, when the endpoint occurs in the context of competing risks. Our hope is to generate discussion and motivate a search for consensus among those who perform transplantations and statisticians.