Young Adult Oncol. 2017; 6:535–541.33 33. Hashmi SK, Lee SJ, Savani BN, et al. ASBMT Practice Guidelines Committee Survey on Long‐Term Follow‐Up Clinics for Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Survivors. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2018; 24:1119–1124.
34 34. Jagasia M, Clifton C, Vaughan LA, et al. Impact of longitudinal long‐term transplant clinic (LTTC) on survival after allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT). Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008; 14(supp):107.
35 35. Ragon BK, Clifton C, Chen H, et al. Geographic distance is not associated with inferior outcome when using long‐term transplant clinic strategy. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014; 20:53–57.
36 36. Rao K, Darrington DL, Schumacher JJ, et al. Disparity in survival outcome after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for hematologic malignancies according to area of primary residence. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2007; 13:1508–1514.
37 37. Abou‐Nassar KE, Kim HT, Blossom J, et al. The impact of geographic proximity to transplant center on outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2012; 18:708–715.
38 38. Loberiza FR Jr, Lee SJ, Klein JP, et al. Outcomes of hematologic malignancies after unrelated donor hematopoietic cell transplantation according to place of residence. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010; 16:368375.
39 39. Mani S, Rybicki L, Carraway H, et al. Primary care physician preferences and perspectives on long‐term care of survivors of hematologic malignancies and hematopoietic cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2016; 22(Suppl 3):S85–S86.
40 40. Majhail NS, Murphy E, Laud P, et al. Randomized controlled trial of individualized treatment summary and survivorship care plans for hematopoietic cell transplantation survivors. Haematologica. 2019; 104:1084–1092.
41 41. Khera N, Gooley T, Flowers MED, et al. Association of Distance from Transplantation Center and Place of Residence on Outcomes after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2016; 22:1319–1323.
42 42. Inamoto Y, Kim DD, Storer BE, et al. Application of CIBMTR risk score to NIH chronic GVHD at individual centers. Blood. 2014; 123:453–455.
43 43. Arora M, Hemmer MT, Ahn KW, et al. Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research chronic graft‐versus‐host disease risk score predicts mortality in an independent validation cohort. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015; 21:640–645.
44 44. Powell RE, Henstenburg JM, Cooper G, et al. Patient Perceptions of Telehealth Primary Care Video Visits. Ann Fam Med. 2017; 15:225–229.
45 45. Wootton R. Twenty years of telemedicine in chronic disease management–an evidence synthesis. J Telemed Telecare. 2012; 18:211–220.
46 46. Ahrendt AD, Kattelmann KK, Rector TS, Maddox DA. The effectiveness of telemedicine for weight management in the MOVE! Program. J Rural Health. 2014; 30:113–119.
47 47. Myhill K. Telepsychiatry in rural South Australia. J Telemed Telecare. 1996; 2:224225.
48 48. Kavanagh SJ, Yellowlees PM. Telemedicine‐‐clinical applications in mental health. Aust Fam Physician. 1995; 24:12421247.
49 49. Johnson A, Gorman M, Lewis C, et al. Interactive videoconferencing improves nutrition intervention in a rural population. J Am Diet Assoc. 2001; 101:173–174.
50 50. Darkins A, Ryan P, Kobb R, et al. Care Coordination/Home Telehealth: the systematic implementation of health informatics, home telehealth, and disease management to support the care of veteran patients with chronic conditions. Telemed J E Health. 2008; 14:1118–1126.
51 51. Pak H, Triplett CA, Lindquist JH, et al. Store‐and‐forward teledermatology results in similar clinical outcomes to conventional clinic‐based care. J Telemed Telecare. 2007; 13:26–30.
52 52. Gogia SB, Maeder A, Mars M, et al. Unintended Consequences of Tele Health and their Possible Solutions. Contribution of the IMIA Working Group on Telehealth. Yearb Med Inform. 2016:(1):41–46.
53 53. Office of Health Policy, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. Report to Congress: E‐health and telemedicine. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services. 2016. Available from: https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/206751/TelemedicineE‐HealthReport.pdf (accessed 24 August 2020).
54 54. Komaromy M, Duhigg D, Metcalf A, et al. Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes): A new model for educating primary care providers about treatment of substance use disorders. Subst Abus. 2016; 37:20–24.
55 55. Majhail NS, Tao L, Bredeson C, et al. Prevalence of hematopoietic cell transplant survivors in the United States. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013; 19:1498–1501.
56 56. Tuckson RV, Edmunds M, Hodgkins ML. Telehealth. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377:1585–1592.
CHAPTER 5 Long‐term follow‐up calendar
André Tichelli1, Bipin N. Savani2, Shahrukh K. Hashmi3, Navneet S. Majhail4, and Alicia Rovó5
1 Division of Hematology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
2 Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
3 Division of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, William J. von Liebig Transplant Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
4 Blood and Marrow Transplant Program, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA
5 Department of Hematology and Central Hematology Laboratory, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
Introduction
The long‐term follow‐up (LTFU) program aims to provide care for childhood and adulthood survivors after hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). LTFU care of transplanted survivors includes screening and prevention of late complications of the HSCT, education about the possible late consequences of the transplantation, and monitoring of healthcare needs according to risk profile of the survivor.
For transplanted patients in remission from their primary disease and without active chronic graft‐versus‐host disease (GVHD), annual follow‐up visits are considered as a standard. More frequent controls may be required for patients with active chronic GVHD (cGVHD), recurrent infectious complications or other posttransplant complications which need close guidance from experts in posttransplant care. Because long‐term survivors may live in geographical areas far from the transplant center and have usually returned to work, the follow‐up visit should be well prepared in advance to reduce unnecessary long waiting times and avoid forgetting essential elements of LTFU services. Therefore, a well‐adapted LTFU calendar has to be established for each survivor. Health risk after HSCT is strongly associated with a number of factors, which are related to the primary disease and its previous treatment, as well as to the transplantation procedure itself. Since the magnitude of risk and the severity of late complications for an individual patient may greatly vary, the follow‐up care should be individualized on the basis of the patient’s history. For instance, cGVHD is associated with greater risk of secondary squamous cell cancer of
