ArticleCytotherapy2010
Immune mobilization of autologous blood progenitor cells: direct influence on the cellular subsets collected.
Article in Cytotherapy, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adoptive cellular therapy using cells enriched for NKG2D+CD3+CD8+T cells after autologous transplantation for myeloma.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2013Trial
- Incidence of Capillary Leak Syndrome as an Adverse Effect of Drugs in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
- Novel mobilization strategies to enhance autologous immune effector cells in multiple myeloma.Frontiers in bioscience (Elite edition) · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND
aimsA phase I trial examined the ability of immunotherapy to mobilize progenitor and activated T cells.
methodsInterleukin (IL)-2 was administered subcutaneously for 11 days, with granulocyte (G)-colony-stimulating factor (CSF) (5 mcg/kg/day) and granulocyte-macrophage (GM)-CSF (7.5 mcg/kg/day) added for the last 5 days. Leukapheresis was initiated on day 11. Thirteen patients were treated (myeloma n = 11, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma n = 2).
resultsToxicities were minimal. IL-2 was stopped in two patients because of capillary leak (n = 1) and diarrhea (n = 1). Each patient required 2.5 leukaphereses (median; range 1-3) to collect 3.2 x 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg (median; range 1.9-6.6 x 10⁶/kg). Immune mobilization increased the number of CD3+ CD8+ T cells (P = 0.002), CD56+ natural killer (NK) cells (P = 0.0001), CD8+ CD56+ T cells (P = 0.002) and CD4+ CD25+ cells (P = 0.0001) compared with cancer patients mobilized with G-CSF alone. There was increased lysis of myeloma cells after 7 days (P = 0.03) or 11 days (P = 0.02). The maximum tolerated dose of IL-2 was 1 x 10⁶ IU/m²/day.
conclusionsImmune mobilization is well tolerated with normal subsequent marrow engraftment. As cells within the graft influence lymphocyte recovery, an increased number of functional lymphocytes may result in more rapid immune reconstitution.
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.