ArticleClinical and experimental immunology2010
Characterization of long-term mixed donor-donor chimerism after double cord blood transplantation.
Article in Clinical and experimental immunology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Primary graft failure, but not relapse, may be identified by early chimerism following double cord blood unit transplantation.Blood advances · 2022Trial
- Rapid induction of single donor chimerism after double umbilical cord blood transplantation preceded by reduced intensity conditioning: results of the HOVON 106 phase II study.Haematologica · 2014Trial
- Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients With Mixed Chimerism Following Double Cord Blood Transplantation: A Case Report.Case reports in hematology · 2026Article
- Assessment of TREC, KREC and telomere length in long-term survivors after allogeneic HSCT: the role of GvHD and graft source and evidence for telomere homeostasis in young recipients.Bone marrow transplantation · 2018Article
- Combining Flow and Mass Cytometry in the Search for Biomarkers in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease.Frontiers in immunology · 2017Article
- Article
- Cellular engineering and therapy in combination with cord blood allografting in pediatric recipients.Bone marrow transplantation · 2016Review
- How to Improve Cord Blood Engraftment?Frontiers in medicine · 2016Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Double cord blood transplantation (DCBT) with two matched or partially matched cord blood units has been implemented successfully to circumvent the limitations of graft cell dose associated with single CBT. After DCBT, sustained haematopoiesis is derived almost exclusively from only one of the donated units. None the less, we previously observed two of six evaluable DCBT patients still having mixed donor-donor chimerism at 28 and 45 months post-transplantation, respectively. In the present study we utilize flow cytometry techniques to perform the first thorough analysis of phenotype and functionality of cord blood units in patients with mixed donor-donor chimerism. Our results suggest that the two stable cord blood units are different phenotypically and functionally: one unit shows more naive T cells, lower T cell cytokine production and higher frequencies of natural killer cells, the other shows higher frequencies of well-differentiated and functional lymphocytes. Additionally, in comparison with control patients having a single prevailing cord blood unit, the patients with donor-donor chimerism exhibit less overall T cell cytokine production and a smaller fraction of memory T cells. Furthermore, our results indicate that human leucocyte antigen-C match of donor units may partly explain the development of a donor-donor mixed chimerism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.