Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18469873›Full record

ReviewBone marrow transplantation2008

Selection of cord blood unit(s) for transplantation.

D A Wall, K W Chan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Bone marrow transplantation, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Cord blood transplantation in adults.Bone marrow transplantation · 2009
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

D A Wall1Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplantation Program, Texas Transplant Institute, San Antonio, Texas 78229, USA. donna.wall@mhshealth.com
K W Chan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Selection of cord blood (CB) units for transplantation involves combining both cell dose and HLA matching as independent yet overlapping variables. Cell dose and cell yield at the time of transplant are critical given that the transplants are being performed with minimal cells for reliable engraftment. In transplants for malignant disorders, the greater allogenicity and lower relapse rate associated with the less well-matched units balance any benefit of better HLA matching on TRM. The only factor that has repeatedly been associated with improved outcome post CB transplant is cell dose. The CB inventories are rapidly increasing in size and the quality of CB units being banked (larger, better characterized) is improving. With this, some of our current limitations in CB availability will soon become moot. Explorations into CB expansion and multiple CB unit transplants are addressing the limited cell doses attainable with a single CB collection. At this point, one must conclude that bigger is better when selecting CB units for transplantation.

Indexed as

Cord Blood Stem Cell TransplantationHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHistocompatibility TestingFetal BloodHumansTissue DonorsTransplantation, Homologous

Identifiers

PMID18469873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.