Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19343534›Full record

ReviewMycopathologia2009

Invasive fungal infection in haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: epidemiology from the transplant physician's viewpoint.

E J Bow

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Mycopathologia, 2009. 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
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Tolerability and outcome of once weekly liposomal amphotericin B for the prevention of invasive fungal infections in hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients with graft-versus-host disease.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2016
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

E J BowSections of Infectious Diseases and Haematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. ebow@hsc.mb.ca
Manitoba Health · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The practice of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has undergone many changes that affect the likelihood that a given patient would develop an invasive fungal infection (IFI). The risks for IFI and the types of IFI that may occur are not continuous over the time course after transplantation. IFIs vary with the events that occur during the pre-engraftment neutropenic period, the early post-engraftment period until approximately day 100 post-transplant, and those in the late post-engraftment period after day 100. A number of well-recognized transplant recipient-, transplant procedure-, and transplant complication-related factors play a role in the likelihood of IFI. Important recipient-related factors include age, state of the underlying disease for which the HSCT is being done, and treatment-related history. Transplant procedure-related factors include the type of transplant (autologous or allogeneic), the use of and timing of anti-fungal prevention strategies including whether or not the transplant was conducted in a protected environment to minimize environmental exposure to mould conidia, the choice of conditioning (myeloablative or non-myeloablative), human leucocyte antigen-relatedness [autologous, matched related, mismatched related (including haploidentical pairings), unrelated (matched or mismatched)], stem cell source (bone marrow, peripheral, or cord blood), stem cell dosing, and stem cell product processing (red cell, plasma, or T-lymphocyte depletions, or CD34 selections). Transplant-related complications include duration of pre-engraftment period of neutropenia, graft failure or rejection, the degree of cytotoxic conditioning therapy-related intestinal mucosal damage, acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GvHD), the use of corticosteroids for the prevention or management of GvHD, the presence of cytomegalovirus infection and disease. The interaction of these factors over a given patient's journey through HSCT conspires to promote or reduce the overall IFI risk and set the conditions for the development of any given IFI. The following discussion attempts to look at this from the perspective of the transplant physician struggling to account for these interactions and their attendant risks for IFI.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsGraft vs Host DiseaseHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansImmunosuppression TherapyMitosporic FungiMycosesNeutropeniaPhysiciansRisk FactorsAntifungal Agents

Identifiers

PMID19343534
OpenAlexW2031748785

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.