Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

HCT is a procedure in which hematopoietic stem cells are intravenously infused to restore bone marrow and immune function in cancer patients who receive bone marrow-toxic doses of cytotoxic drugs with or without whole-body radiotherapy. Hematopoietic stem cells may be obtained from the transplant recipient (autologous HCT) or a donor (allogeneic HCT [allo-HCT]). They can be harvested from bone marrow, peripheral blood, or umbilical cord blood shortly after delivery of neonates.

Immunologic compatibility between infused hematopoietic stem cells and the recipient is not an issue in autologous HCT. In allogeneic stem cell transplantation, immunologic compatibility between donor and patient is a critical factor for achieving a successful outcome. Compatibility is established by typing of human leukocyte antigens (HLA) using cellular, serologic, or molecular techniques. HLA refers to the gene complex expressed at the HLA-A, -B, and -DR (antigen-D related) loci on each arm of chromosome six. An acceptable donor will match the patient at all or most of the HLA loci.

Conditioning for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

Conventional Conditioning

The conventional (“classical”) practice of allo-HCT involves administration of cytotoxic agents (e.g., cyclophosphamide, busulfan) with or without total body irradiation at doses sufficient to cause bone marrow ablation in the recipient. The beneficial treatment effect of this procedure is due to a combination of the initial eradication of malignant cells and subsequent graft-versus-malignancy effect mediated by non-self-immunologic effector cells. While the slower graft-versus-malignancy effect is considered the potentially curative component, it may be overwhelmed by existing disease in the absence of pretransplant conditioning. Intense conditioning regimens are limited to patients who are sufficiently medically fit to tolerate substantial adverse effects. These include opportunistic infections secondary to loss of endogenous bone marrow function and organ damage or failure caused by cytotoxic drugs. Subsequent to graft infusion in allo-HCT, immunosuppressant drugs are required to minimize graft rejection and graft-versus-host disease, which increases susceptibility to opportunistic infections.

The success of autologous HCT is predicated on the potential of cytotoxic chemotherapy, with or without radiotherapy, to eradicate cancerous cells from the blood and bone marrow. This permits subsequent engraftment and repopulation of the bone marrow with presumably normal hematopoietic stem cells obtained from the patient before undergoing bone marrow ablation. Therefore, autologous HCT is typically performed as consolidation therapy when the patient’s disease is in complete remission. Patients who undergo autologous HCT are also susceptible to chemotherapy-related toxicities and opportunistic infections before engraftment, but not graft-versus-host disease.

Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

RIC refers to the pretransplant use of lower doses of cytotoxic drugs or less intense regimens of radiotherapy than are used in traditional full-dose myeloablative conditioning treatments. Although the definition of RIC is variable, with numerous versions employed, all regimens seek to balance the competing effects of relapse due to residual disease and non-relapse mortality. The goal of RIC is to reduce disease burden and to minimize associated treatment-related morbidity and non-relapse mortality in the period during which the beneficial graft-versus-malignancy effect of allogeneic transplantation develops. RIC regimens range from nearly total myeloablative to minimally myeloablative with lymphoablation, with intensity tailored to specific diseases and patient condition. Patients who undergo RIC with allo-HCT initially demonstrate donor cell engraftment and bone marrow mixed chimerism. Most will subsequently convert to full-donor chimerism. In this review, the term reduced-intensity conditioning will refer to all conditioning regimens intended to be nonmyeloablative.

Regulatory Status

According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, cord blood stored for potential use by a patient unrelated to the donor meets the definitions of “drug” and “biological products.” As such, products must be licensed under a biologics license application or an investigational new drug application before use. Facilities that prepare cord blood units only for autologous and/or first- or second-degree relatives are required to register and list their products, adhere to Good Tissue Practices issued by the Food and Drug Administration, and use applicable processes for donor suitability determination.^1,

Related Policies

• Various disease-specific hematopoietic stem cell transplantation policies in the Treatment Section

(Please note that Umbilical Cord Blood Banking and Storage services may be available to Horizon BCBSNJ expectant mothers through a special discount program. This program and other similar programs are intended to provide discounts and savings on certain products and services which are not covered benefits under the member’s health care coverage.)

For members enrolled in Medicaid and NJ FamilyCare plans, Horizon BCBSNJ applies the above medical policy.

FIDE SNP:

For members enrolled in a Fully Integrated Dual Eligible Special Needs Plan (FIDE-SNP): (1) to the extent the service is covered under the Medicare portion of the member’s benefit package, the above Medicare Coverage statement applies; and (2) to the extent the service is not covered under the Medicare portion of the member’s benefit package, the above Medicaid Coverage statement applies.

Policy Guidelines: (Information to guide medical necessity determination based on the criteria contained within the policy statements above.)

Refer to the reference policies for specific conditions and diseases that have patient selection criteria for which allogeneic stem cell transplantation may be considered medically necessary.


[RATIONALE: This policy was created in 1997 and has been updated regularly with searches of the MEDLINE database. The most recent literature update was performed through November 11, 2019. This review was informed by a 1996 and a 2001 TEC Assessment, which addressed the use of placental and umbilical cord blood in children and adults, respectively.^2,3,

Evidence reviews assess the clinical evidence to determine whether the use of technology improves the net health outcome. Broadly defined, health outcomes are the length of life, quality of life, and ability to function¾including benefits and harms. Every clinical condition has specific outcomes that are important to patients and managing the course of that condition. Validated outcome measures are necessary to ascertain whether a condition improves or worsens; and whether the magnitude of that change is clinically significant. The net health outcome is a balance of benefits and harms.

To assess whether the evidence is sufficient to draw conclusions about the net health outcome of technology, two domains are examined: the relevance, and quality and credibility. To be relevant, studies must represent one or more intended clinical use of the technology in the intended population and compare an effective and appropriate alternative at a comparable intensity. For some conditions, the alternative will be supportive care or surveillance. The quality and credibility of the evidence depend on study design and conduct, minimizing bias and confounding that can generate incorrect findings. The randomized controlled trial (RCT) is preferred to assess efficacy; however, in some circumstances, nonrandomized studies may be adequate. RCTs are rarely large enough or long enough to capture less common adverse events and long-term effects. Other types of studies can be used for these purposes and to assess generalizability to broader clinical populations and settings of clinical practice.

Cord Blood as Source of Stem Cells for Stem Cell Transplant

A variety of malignant diseases and nonmalignant bone marrow disorders are treated with myeloablative therapy followed by infusion of the allogeneic stem and progenitor cells collected from immunologically compatible donors, either family members or an unrelated donor identified through a bone marrow donor bank. In some cases, a suitable donor is not found.

Blood harvested from the umbilical cord and placenta shortly after delivery of neonates contains stem and progenitor cells capable of restoring hematopoietic function after myeloablation. This cord blood has been used as an alternative source of allogeneic stem cells. Cord blood is readily available and is thought to be antigenically “naive,” thus potentially minimizing the incidence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and permitting the broader use of unrelated cord blood transplants. Unrelated donors are typically typed at low resolution for human leukocyte antigen‒A and ‒B and at high resolution only for human leukocyte antigen‒DR; human leukocyte antigen matching at four of six loci is considered acceptable. Under this matching protocol, an acceptable donor can be identified for almost any patient.

Several cord blood banks have been created in the U.S. and Europe. In addition to obtaining cord blood for specific related or unrelated patients, some cord blood banks collect and store neonate cord blood for some unspecified future use in the unlikely event that the child develops a condition that would require autologous transplantation. Also, some neonate cord blood is collected and stored for use by a sibling in whom an allogeneic transplant is anticipated due to a history of leukemia or other condition requiring an allogeneic transplant.

Standards and accreditation for cord blood banks are important for assisting transplant programs in knowing whether individual banks have quality control measures in place to address issues such as monitoring cell loss, change in potency, and prevention of product mix-up.^4, Two major organizations have created accreditation standards for cord blood banks in the U.S.: the American Association of Blood Banks and the International NetCord Foundation/Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy. Both the American Association of Blood Banks and the International NetCord Foundation/Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy have developed and implemented a program of voluntary inspection and accreditation for cord blood banking. The American Association ofBlood Banks and the International NetCord Foundation/Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy publish standards for cord blood banks that define the collection, testing, processing, storage, and release of cord blood products.^5,

Clinical Context and Therapy Purpose

The purpose of using placental and umbilical cord blood as a source of stem cells is to provide an alternative to or an improvement on existing donor sources in patients with an appropriate indication for allogeneic stem cell transplant.

The question addressed in this policy is: Does the use of placental and umbilical cord blood as a source of stem cells for individuals with an indication for allogeneic stem cell transplantation result in an improvement in net health outcomes?

The following PICOswere used to select literature to inform this review.

Patients

The relevant population of interest are individuals with an appropriate indication for allogeneic stem cell transplant.

Interventions

The therapy being considered is placental or umbilical cord blood as a source of stem cells for allogeneic stem cell transplantation.

Patients with an appropriate indication for allogeneic stem cell transplant are managed by a transplant specialist in an inpatient clinical setting.

Comparators

Comparators of interest include stem cells from other donor sources.

Patients with an appropriate indication for allogeneic stem cell transplant are managed by a transplant specialist in an inpatient clinical setting.

Outcomes

The general outcomes of interest are overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival, resource utilization, and treatment-related mortality.

The timing of follow-up is initially the first post-transplant year for successful engraftment and monitoring relevant outcomes. Follow-up is life-long for successful transplantation.

Study Selection Criteria

Methodologically credible studies were selected using the following principles:

a. To assess efficacy outcomes, comparative controlled prospective trials were sought, with a preference for RCTs;
b. In the absence of such trials, comparative observational studies were sought, with a preference for prospective studies.
c. To assess long-term outcomes and adverse effects, single-arm studies that capture longer periods of follow-up and/or larger populations were sought.
d. Studies with duplicative or overlapping populations were excluded.

The first cord blood transplant involved a child with Fanconi anemia; results were reported in 1989.^6, Subsequently, other cord transplants have been performed in matched siblings. The results of these transplants have demonstrated that cord blood contains sufficient numbers of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells to reconstitute pediatric patients. Lower incidences of acute and chronicGVHD have been observed when cord blood, compared with bone marrow, was used as the source of donor cells.^7,This led to the idea that cord blood could be banked and used as a source of unrelated donor cells, possibly without full human leukocyte antigen matching.^8,

Unrelated Allogeneic Cord Blood Transplant

The first prospective evaluation of unrelated cord blood transplant was the Cord Blood Transplantation study, published in 2005. The Cord Blood Transplantation study was designed to examine the safety of unrelated cord blood transplantation in infants, children, and adults. Two-year event-free survival was 55% in children with high-risk malignancies^9, and 78% in children with nonmalignant conditions.^10, Across all groups, the cumulative incidence of engraftment by day 42 was 80%. Engraftment and survival were adversely affected by lower cell doses, pretransplant cytomegalovirus seropositivity in the recipient, non-European ancestry, and higher human leukocyte antigen mismatching. This slower engraftment led to longer hospitalizations and greater utilization of medical resources.^11, In the Cord Blood Transplantation study, outcomes in adults were inferior to the outcomes achieved in children.

Zhang et al (2012) published a meta-analysis of studies comparing unrelated donor cord blood transplantation with unrelated donor bone marrow transplantation in patients who had acute leukemia.^12, Reviewers identified 7 studies (total n=3389 patients). Pooled event rates of engraftment failure (n=5 studies) were 18% (127/694 patients) in the cord blood transplant group and 6% (57/951 patients) in bone marrow transplant groups. The rate of engraftment graft failure was significantly higher in cord blood transplant recipients (p<0.001). However, rates of acute GVHD were significantly lower in the cord blood transplant group. Pooled event rates of GVHD (n=7 studies) were 34% (397/1179 patients) in the cord blood group and 44% (953/2189 patients) in the bone marrow group (p<0.001). Relapse rates, reported in all studies, did not differ significantly between groups. Several survival outcomes, including OS, leukemia-free survival, and nonrelapse mortality, favored the bone marrow transplant group.

Also, numerous retrospective and registry studies have generally found that unrelated cord blood transplantation is effective in both children and adults with hematologic malignancies and children with a variety of nonmalignant conditions.^13,14,15, For example, a study by Liu et al (2014) compared outcomes after unrelated donor cord blood transplantation with matched-sibling donor peripheral blood transplantation.^15, The study included patients ages 16 years or older who had hematologic malignancies. Seventy patients received unrelated cord blood, and 115 patients received human leukocyte antigen-identical peripheral blood stem cells, alone or in combination with bone marrow. Primary engraftment rates were similar in the 2 groups (97% in the cord blood group, 100% in the peripheral blood stem cell group). Rates for most outcomes, including grades III and IV acute GVHD and three-year disease-free survival, were also similar between groups. However, the rate of chronic GVHD was lower in the unrelated donor cord blood group. Specifically, limited or extensive chronic GVHD occurred in 12 (21%) of 58 evaluable patients in the cord blood group and in 46 (42%) of 109 evaluable patients in the peripheral blood stem cell group (p=0.005).

Haplo-Cord Blood Transplantation

Haplo-cord transplants involve a combination of donated cord blood stem cells and half-matched (haploidentical) cells from a related donor.

Mo et al (2016) reported on outcomes after umbilical cord blood and haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation in 129 children younger than 14 years old.^16, The 2-year probability of OS was 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72.2% to 91.8%) in the haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation group and 69.9% (95% CI, 58.0% to 81.2%) in the cord blood group. The difference in OS rates between groups was not statistically significant (p=0.07). The 2-year incidence of relapse was also similar in both groups: 16% (95% CI, 6.1% to 26.1%) in the haploidenticalhematopoietic cell transplantation group and 24.1% (95% CI, 12.5% to 37.5%) in the cord blood group (p=0.17).

Hsu et al (2018) reported on patients with lymphoma or chronic lymphoblastic leukemia who underwent haplo-cord allogeneic stem cell transplantation.^17, Forty-two patients treated between 2007 and 2016 were included in the analysis. After a median survivor follow-up of 42 months, the median 3-year GVHD relapse-free survival, progression-free survival, and OS were 53% (95% CI: 36-68%), 62% (95% CI: 44-75%), and 65% (95% CI: 48-78%), respectively. The cumulative incidence of relapse was 12% at 100 days and 19.5% at 1 year.^17,

Double Unit Cord Blood Transplantation

Transplantation of two umbilical cord blood units (or double-unit transplants) has been evaluated as a strategy to overcome cell dose limitations with one cord blood unit in older and heavier patients. Initial experience at a university showed that using two units of cord blood for a single transplant in adults improved rates of engraftment and OS.^18, Although cell doses are higher with double-unit transplants, studies published to date have found that survival rates are similar to transplants using single-cord blood units, and there is some suggestion of higher rates of GVHD (see Tables 1 and 2).^19,

Table 1. Summary of Key Trial Characteristics

					Interventions
Author (Year)	Countries	Sites	Dates	Participants	Active	Comparator
Wagner et al (2014)19,		1		Patients (age range, 1-21 y) who had high-risk acute leukemia, chronic myeloid leukemia, or myelodysplastic syndrome for whom there were 2 HLA-matched cord blood units available	2 units	1 unit

HLA: human leukocyte antigen.

Table 2. Summary of Key Trial Results (N=224)

Study (Year)	1-Year OS	1-Year DFS	Acute GVHD	Chronic GVHD
Wagner et al (2014)19,
Single unit (95% CI), %	73 (63 to 80)	70 (60 to 77)	13 (7 to 20)	30 (22 to 39)
Double unit (95% CI), %	65 (56 to 74)	64 (54 to 72)	23 (15 to 31)	32 (23 to 40)
p	0.17	0.011	0.02	0.51

CI: confidence interval; DFS: disease-free survival; GVHD: graft-versus-host disease; OS: overall survival.

Results of observational studies are similar to those of the Wagner et al (2014) RCT (see Tables 3 and 4). In a study by Scaradavou et al (2013), there was a significantly higher risk of acute GVHD (grade II-IV) in recipients of double-cord blood units treated during the first several years of observation.^20,In the later period (2004-2009), rates of acute GVHD (grade II-IV) did not differ significantly between single- and double-units of cord blood. An analysis by Baron et al (2017) found no significant differences between single- and double-cord blood transplantation for relapse or nonrelapse mortality, with a trend (p=0.08) toward a higher incidence of GVHD with double units.^21,

Table 3. Summary of Key Observational Study Characteristics

				Treatment
Author (Year)	Study Type	Dates	Participants	Arm 1	Arm 2	Follow-Up
Scaradavou et al (2013)20,	Comparative cohort	2002-2004 2004-2009		Single unit	Double unit
Baron et al (2017)21,	Registry	2004-2014	Adults with first CBT for AML or ALL	Single unit	Double unit	2 y

ALL: acute lymphocytic leukemia; AML: acute myeloid leukemia; CBT: cord blood transplantation.

Table 4. Summary of Key Observational Study Results

				Acute GVHD (95% CI)
Study (Year)	N	Relapse Mortality	Nonrelapse Mortality	2002-2004	2004-2009
Scaradavou et al (2013)20,
Single unit
Double unit
HR (95% CI)				6.14 (2.54 to 14.87)	1.69 (0.68 to 4.18)
p				<0.001	0.30
				2004-2014
Baron et al (2017)21,
Single unit	172			28%
Double unit	362			36%
HR (95% CI)		0.9 (0.6 to 1.3)	0.8 (0.5 to 1.2)
p		0.5	0.3	0.08

CI: confidence interval; GVHD: graft-versus-host disease; HR: hazard ratio

Section Summary: Cord Blood as Source of Stem Cells for Stem Cell Transplant

A number of observational studies and meta-analyses of observational studies have compared outcomes after cord blood transplantation with stem cells from a different source. One meta-analysis found similar survival outcomes and lower GVHD after cord blood transplantation than bone marrow transplantation. Also, an RCT has compared single- and double-unit cord blood transplantation and found similar outcomes.

Prophylactic Collection and Storage of Cord Blood

Clinical Context and Therapy Purpose

The purpose of prophylactic collection and storage of placental or umbilical cord blood stem cells is to provide an alternative donor source for individuals without or with an unspecified potential future need for stem cell transplant.

The question addressed in this policy is: Does the prophylactic collection and storage of placental and umbilical cord blood stem cells to provide an alternative donor source for individuals without or with an unspecified potential future need for stem cell transplantation improve net health outcomes.

The following PICOs were used to select literature to inform this review.

Patients

The relevant population of interest are individuals without or with an unspecified potential future need for stem cell transplant.

Interventions

The test being considered is prophylactic collection and storage of placental or umbilical cord blood stem cells.

The collection and preservation of placental or umbilical cord for future use is carried out at the time of labor and delivery and is carried out by commercial service providers.

Comparators

Comparators of interest include usual care without prophylactic storage of cord blood.

The setting of care is indeterminate and depends upon the condition being treated.

Outcomes

The general outcomes of interest are OS, disease-specific survival, resource utilization, and treatment-related mortality.

The future use of stored stem cells is unknown and, thus, the follow-up time period to transplant is indeterminate.

Study Selection Criteria

Methodologically credible studies were selected using the principles described in the first indication.

No studies have compared outcomes after prophylactic collection and storage of cord blood from a neonate for individuals who have an unspecified future need for transplant to standard care without cord blood collection and storage.

Also, although blood banks are collecting and storing neonate cord blood for potential future use, data on the use of cord blood for autologous stem cell transplantation are limited. A 2017 position paper from the American Academy of Pediatrics noted that there is little evidence of the safety or effectiveness of autologous cord blood transplantation for the treatment of malignant neoplasms.^22,Also, a 2009 survey of pediatric hematologists noted few transplants had been performed using cord blood stored in the absences of a known indication.^23,

Section Summary: Prophylactic Collection and Storage of Cord Blood

There is a lack of published evidence comparing outcomes after prophylactic collection and storage of cord blood from a neonate for individuals who have an unspecified future need for transplant with standard care without cord blood collection and storage.

Summary of Evidence

For individuals who have an appropriate indication for allogeneic stem cell transplant who receive cord blood as a source of stem cells, the evidence includes a number of observational studies, a meta-analysis of observational studies, and an RCT comparing outcomes after single- or double-cord blood units. The relevant outcomes are OS, disease-specific survival, resource utilization, and treatment-related mortality. The meta-analysis of observational studies found similar survival outcomes and lower GVHD after cord blood transplantation than bone marrow transplantation. In the RCT, survival rates were similar after single- and double-unit cord blood transplantation. The evidence is sufficient to determine that the technology results in a meaningful improvement in the net health outcome.

For individuals who have an unspecified potential future need for stem cell transplant who receive prophylactic collection and storage of cord blood, the evidence includes no published studies. The relevant outcomes are OS, disease-specific survival, resource utilization, and treatment-related mortality. No evidence was identified on the safety or effectiveness of autologous cord blood transplantation from prophylactically stored cord blood for the treatment of malignant neoplasms. The evidence is insufficient to determine the effects of the technology on health outcomes.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Practice Guidelines and Position Statements

American Academy of Pediatrics

A position statement on cord blood banking for potential future transplantation was published by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2017.^22, The Academy recommended cord blood banking for public use, with a more limited role for private cord blood banking for families with a known fatal illness that could be rescued by cord blood transplant.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2015; updated 2019) published an opinion on umbilical cord blood (UCB) banking.^24,The statement discussed counseling patients on options for UCB banking, as well as the benefits and limitations of this practice. The relevant recommendations included the following:

• "[UCB] collected from a neonate cannot be used to treat a genetic disease or malignancy in that same individual.”
• The routine collection and storage of [UCB] with a private cord blood bank is not supported by the available evidence.
• “Private [UCB] banking may be considered when there is knowledge of a family member with a medical condition (malignant or genetic) who could potentially benefit from cord blood transplantation.”
• “Public [UCB] banking is the recommended method of obtaining [UBC] for use in transplantation, immune therapies, or other medically validated indications.”
• “Umbilical cord blood collection should not compromise obstetric or neonatal care or alter routine practice for the timing of umbilical cord clamping.”
• “The current indications for cord blood transplant are limited to select genetic, hematologic, and malignant disorders.”
• “If a patient requests information about [UCB] banking, balanced and accurate information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of public and private [UCB] banking should be provided.”

On behalf of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Ballen et al (2008) published recommendations related to the banking of UBC^25,:

1. Public banking of cord blood is “encouraged.”
2. Storing cord blood for autologous (ie, personal) use “is not recommended.”
3. “Family member banking (collecting and storing cord blood for a family member) is recommended when there is a sibling with a disease that may be successfully treated with an allogeneic transplant. Family member banking on behalf of a parent with a disease that may be successfully treated with an allogeneic transplant is only recommended when there are shared HLA [human leukocyte]-antigens between the parents.”

Not applicable.

Ongoing and Unpublished Clinical Trials

Some currently ongoing and unpublished trials that might influence this review are listed in Table 5.

Table 5. Summary of Key Trials

NCT No.	Trial Name	Planned Enrollment	Completion Date
Ongoing
NCT01728545	The Collection and Storage of Umbilical Cord Blood for Transplantation	250,000	Apr 2099
NCT00012545	Collection and Storage of Umbilical Cord Stem Cells for Treatment of Sickle Cell Disease	99,999,999	not reported

NCT: national clinical trial.]
________________________________________________________________________________________

Horizon BCBSNJ Medical Policy Development Process:

This Horizon BCBSNJ Medical Policy (the “Medical Policy”) has been developed by Horizon BCBSNJ’s Medical Policy Committee (the “Committee”) consistent with generally accepted standards of medical practice, and reflects Horizon BCBSNJ’s view of the subject health care services, supplies or procedures, and in what circumstances they are deemed to be medically necessary or experimental/ investigational in nature. This Medical Policy also considers whether and to what degree the subject health care services, supplies or procedures are clinically appropriate, in terms of type, frequency, extent, site and duration and if they are considered effective for the illnesses, injuries or diseases discussed. Where relevant, this Medical Policy considers whether the subject health care services, supplies or procedures are being requested primarily for the convenience of the covered person or the health care provider. It may also consider whether the services, supplies or procedures are more costly than an alternative service or sequence of services, supplies or procedures that are at least as likely to produce equivalent therapeutic or diagnostic results as to the diagnosis or treatment of the relevant illness, injury or disease. In reaching its conclusion regarding what it considers to be the generally accepted standards of medical practice, the Committee reviews and considers the following: all credible scientific evidence published in peer-reviewed medical literature generally recognized by the relevant medical community, physician and health care provider specialty society recommendations, the views of physicians and health care providers practicing in relevant clinical areas (including, but not limited to, the prevailing opinion within the appropriate specialty) and any other relevant factor as determined by applicable State and Federal laws and regulations.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Index:
Placental and Umbilical Cord Blood as a Source of Stem Cells
Cord Blood as a Source of Stem Cells
Placental Blood as a Source of Stem Cells
Stem Cells from Cord Blood
Transplantation, Placental and Umbilical Cord Blood as a Source of Stem Cells
Umbilical Cord Blood as a Source of Stem Cells

References:
1. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Cord Blood Banking: Information for Consumers. 2012 July 23; http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/resourcesforyou/consumers/ucm236044.htm. Accessed November 21, 2019.

2. Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center (TEC). Placental and Umbilical Cord Blood as a Source of Stem Cells for Hematopoietic Support. TEC Assessments. 1996;Volume 11:Tab 17.

3. Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center (TEC). Transplanting Adult Patients with Hematopoietic Stem Cells from Placental and Umbilical Cord Blood TEC Assessments. 2001;Volume 16:Tab 17.

4. Wall DA. Regulatory issues in cord blood banking and transplantation. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol. Jun 2010;23(2):171-177. PMID 20837328

5. NetCord-FACT. International standards for cord blood collection banking and release of information accreditation manual. Sixth Edition Draft. 2015 September; http://www.factwebsite.org/uploadedFiles/Standards/NetCord%20FACT%206th%20Ed%20Manual%20Draft.09.01.15.pdf. Accessed November 21, 2019.

6. Gluckman E, Broxmeyer HA, Auerbach AD, et al. Hematopoietic reconstitution in a patient with Fanconi's anemia by means of umbilical-cord blood from an HLA-identical sibling. N Engl J Med. Oct 26 1989;321(17):1174-1178. PMID 2571931

7. Wagner JE, Rosenthal J, Sweetman R, et al. Successful transplantation of HLA-matched and HLA-mismatched umbilical cord blood from unrelated donors: analysis of engraftment and acute graft-versus-host disease. Blood. Aug 1 1996;88(3):795-802. PMID 8704232

8. Broxmeyer HE, Douglas GW, Hangoc G, et al. Human umbilical cord blood as a potential source of transplantable hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. May 1989;86(10):3828-3832. PMID 2566997

9. Kurtzberg J, Cairo MS, Fraser JK, et al. Results of the Cord Blood Transplantation (COBLT) study unrelated donor banking program. Transfusion. Jun 2005;45(6):842-855. PMID 15934981

10. Martin PL, Carter SL, Kernan NA, et al. Results of the Cord Blood Transplantation Study (COBLT): outcomes of unrelated donor umbilical cord blood transplantation in pediatric patients with lysosomal and peroxisomal storage diseases. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. Feb 2006;12(2):184-194. PMID 16443516

11. Kurtzberg J. Update on umbilical cord blood transplantation. Curr Opin Pediatr. Feb 2009;21(1):22-29. PMID 19253461

12. Zhang H, Chen J, Que W. Meta-analysis of unrelated donor umbilical cord blood transplantation versus unrelated donor bone marrow transplantation in acute leukemia patients. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. Aug 2012;18(8):1164-1173. PMID 22289799

13. Rocha V, Cornish J, Sievers EL, et al. Comparison of outcomes of unrelated bone marrow and umbilical cord blood transplants in children with acute leukemia. Blood. May 15 2001;97(10):2962-2971. PMID 11342418

14. Kato K, Choi I, Wake A, et al. Treatment of patients with adult T cell leukemia/lymphoma with cord blood transplantation: a Japanese nationwide retrospective survey. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. Dec 2014;20(12):1968-1974. PMID 25172635

15. Liu HL, Sun ZM, Geng LQ, et al. Similar survival, but better quality of life after myeloablative transplantation using unrelated cord blood vs matched sibling donors in adults with hematologic malignancies. Bone Marrow Transplant. Aug 2014;49(8):1063-1069. PMID 24842525

16. Mo XD, Tang BL, Zhang XH, et al. Comparison of outcomes after umbilical cord blood and unmanipulated haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in children with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Int J Cancer. Nov 1 2016;139(9):2106-2115. PMID 27356906

17. Hsu J, Artz A, Mayer SA, et al. Combined Haploidentical and Umbilical Cord Blood Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation for High-Risk Lymphoma and Chronic Lymphoblastic Leukemia. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. Feb 2018;24(2):359-365. PMID 29128555

18. Barker JN, Weisdorf DJ, DeFor TE, et al. Transplantation of 2 partially HLA-matched umbilical cord blood units to enhance engraftment in adults with hematologic malignancy. Blood. Feb 1 2005;105(3):1343-1347. PMID 15466923

19. Wagner JE, Jr., Eapen M, Carter S, et al. One-unit versus two-unit cord-blood transplantation for hematologic cancers. N Engl J Med. Oct 30 2014;371(18):1685-1694. PMID 25354103

20. Scaradavou A, Brunstein CG, Eapen M, et al. Double unit grafts successfully extend the application of umbilical cord blood transplantation in adults with acute leukemia. Blood. Jan 31 2013;121(5):752-758. PMID 23223509

21. Baron F, Ruggeri A, Beohou E, et al. Single- or double-unit UCBT following RIC in adults with AL: a report from Eurocord, the ALWP and the CTIWP of the EBMT. J Hematol Oncol. Jun 21 2017;10(1):128. PMID 28637512

22. Shearer WT, Lubin BH, Cairo MS, et al. Cord Blood Banking for Potential Future Transplantation. Pediatrics. Nov 2017;140(5). PMID 29084832

23. Thornley I, Eapen M, Sung L, et al. Private cord blood banking: experiences and views of pediatric hematopoietic cell transplantation physicians. Pediatrics. Mar 2009;123(3):1011-1017. PMID 19255033

24. ACOG committee opinion no. 771: umbilical cord banking. Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Mar;133(3):e249e253. PMID: 30801478.

25. Ballen KK, Barker JN, Stewart SK, et al. Collection and preservation of cord blood for personal use. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. Mar 2008;14(3):356-363. PMID 18275904

Codes:
(The list of codes is not intended to be all-inclusive and is included below for informational purposes only. Inclusion or exclusion of a procedure, diagnosis, drug or device code(s) does not constitute or imply authorization, certification, approval, offer of coverage or guarantee of payment.)

CPT*

S2140
S2142
S2150