ArticleInternational journal of hematology2011
Quality assessment of umbilical cord blood units at the time of transplantation.
Article in International journal of hematology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of post-thaw CFU-GM: clinical utility and role in quality assessment of umbilical cord blood in patients receiving single unit transplant.Transfusion · 2020Trial
- Impact of length of cryopreservation and origin of cord blood units on hematologic recovery following cord blood transplantation.Bone marrow transplantation · 2015Trial
- Cord blood attached segment: is this a relevant quality control to predict a good hematopoietic stem cell graft?Bone marrow transplantation · 2017Article
- Article
- Cord blood unit factors influencing transplant outcomes from the Asian multiethnic Singapore Cord Blood Bank.Bone marrow transplantation · 2015Article
- Umbilical cord blood transplant for malignancies: a hope or hype.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2013Article
- Modelling improvements in cell yield of banked umbilical cord blood and the impact on availability of donor units for transplantation into adults.Stem cells international · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Total nucleated cell (TNC) count, CD34(+) cell count, colony-forming unit-granulocyte-macrophage (CFU-GM) content, and cell viability impact the outcome of umbilical cord blood (UCB) transplantation. Assessments of unit quality have usually been provided by cord blood banks (CBBs), but it is unclear whether pre-freezing tests or pre-transplant release tests performed by CBBs are reproducible. The aim of this study was to compare the UCB characteristics analyzed at the site of infusion of the UCB with those provided by CBBs. Samples were taken from 54 UCB units for assessment of post-thaw characteristics. TNC counts and CD34(+) cell contents measured at our hospital before infusion showed good correlations with values assessed in pre-freezing tests (r = 0.900 and 0.943, respectively) and pre-transplant release tests (r = 0.829 and 0.930, respectively). Our data reveal that the TNC counts and CD34(+) cell contents determined by pre-freezing and pre-transplant release tests, which are the most important UCB unit selection criteria, accurately reflected the quality of infused UCB units. However, CFU-GM content was poorly correlated (r = 0.560 and 0.606). Correlation of post-thaw cell viabilities measured before infusion and during the pre-transplant release tests was also poor (r = 0.308). We suggest that the TNC count and CD34(+) cell content estimated before cryopreservation and in pre-transplant release tests provided by CBBs are reproducible and can assist the transplant physicians in selection of appropriate UCB units.
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.