ReviewCurrent opinion in hematology2014
Allogeneic transplantation for myelofibrosis: for whom, when, and what are the true benefits?
Review in Current opinion in hematology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Innovative strategies to improve hematopoietic stem cell transplant outcomes in myelofibrosis.American journal of hematology · 2022Review
- Spiritual Well-Being in Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Survivors of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.Journal of psychosocial oncology · 2015Article
- Evading Capture by Residual Disease Monitoring: Extramedullary Manifestation of JAK2 V617F-Positive Primary Myelofibrosis After Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation.Case reports in hematology · 2015Article
- Managing Patients With Myelofibrosis in the Era of Janus Kinase Inhibitors.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewAllogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is the only potentially curative therapy for myelofibrosis. Despite improved outcomes, morbidity and mortality of HSCT remain high. Here we examine recent data on patient selection, timing, and outcomes of HSCT in myelofibrosis. RECENT
findingsWhile there is a general effort to restrict HSCT to transplant-eligible intermediate-2 and high-risk patients, this group has comparatively worse HSCT outcomes, largely driven by their high transplant-related mortality (TRM). When adjusted for age, reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) has shown superior outcomes compared with myeloablative conditioning (MAC), making RIC-HSCT a viable option for older patients. Emerging concepts include the use of ruxolitinib pretransplant, optimizing MAC to decrease toxicity, and use of posttransplant JAK2-mutant allele burden to guide prophylactic immunotherapy to prevent relapse. The recognition of prognostic significance of somatic mutations in the ASXL1, EZH2, SRSF2, and IDH1/2 genes, and the improved assessment of risk of leukemic transformation have added a new dimension to risk stratification. SUMMARY: Improving our understanding of molecular genetics and leukemic transformation holds promise for more precise patient selection for HSCT. Although RIC-HSCT may reduce TRM, further studies are needed to optimize conditioning regimens and to define the optimal timing of HSCT.
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.