Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19421170›Full record

ArticleBone marrow transplantation2010

Are backup BM harvests worthwhile in unrelated donor allogeneic transplants?

C Stotler, B Bolwell, R Sobecks, R Dean, S Serafino, L Rybicki, S Andresen, B Pohlman, M Kalaycio, E Copelan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

C StotlerTaussig Cancer Center, Department of Hematologic Oncology and Blood Disorders, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA. stotlec@ccf.org
B Bolwell
R Sobecks
R Dean
S Serafino
L Rybicki
S Andresen
B Pohlman
M Kalaycio
E Copelan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Cleveland Clinic blood and marrow transplant program has routinely performed 'backup' autologous harvests in unrelated recipients with hematological malignancies in remission, lymphoma without marrow involvement and CML in chronic phase. We reviewed all adult or cord unrelated donor (URD) transplants performed from January 1995 through September 2008 to evaluate the value of this procedure. Of 130 patients who had backup harvests, 15 (11%) had their backup harvests re-infused, all for graft failure. No patients undergoing fully ablative preparation and unmanipulated or T-depleted grafts from well-matched adult donors required infusion of backup marrow. Nine of 42 patients who underwent T cell grafts from partially matched or mismatched donors, five patients undergoing partially matched ablative transplants from adult donors or cord blood, and one patient undergoing non-myeloablative transplant required infusion of their back-up harvest. Five of 15 patients who received their backup marrow are alive in CR 2-11.6 (median 7.6) years from infusion. Two of these five were bridged to a second URD transplant; the other three showed durable disease-free survival without a second allogeneic transplant. Backup harvest is unnecessary for HLA well-matched myeloablative transplants, but may be useful in patients at higher risk of graft failure.

Indexed as

AdultBone MarrowBone Marrow TransplantationCord Blood Stem Cell TransplantationDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHematologic NeoplasmsHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHistocompatibility TestingHumansMaleMiddle AgedTissue DonorsTransplantation, AutologousTransplantation, HomologousTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID19421170

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.