Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25276799›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2014

Timing of peripheral blood stem cell yield: comparison of alternative methods with the classic method for CD34+ cell determination.

I Fatorova, M Blaha, M Lanska, D Vokurkova, V Rezacova, P Zak

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Assessment of haematopoietic progenitor cell counting with the SysmexBlood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2020
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

I Fatorova4th Department of Internal Medicine-Hematology, Charles University, Medical Faculty and Teaching Hospital, Sokolska Street 581, 500 05 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
M Blaha4th Department of Internal Medicine-Hematology, Charles University, Medical Faculty and Teaching Hospital, Sokolska Street 581, 500 05 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
M Lanska4th Department of Internal Medicine-Hematology, Charles University, Medical Faculty and Teaching Hospital, Sokolska Street 581, 500 05 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
D VokurkovaInstitute of Immunology and Allergology, Charles University, Medical Faculty and Teaching Hospital, Sokolska Street 581, 500 05 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
V RezacovaInstitute of Immunology and Allergology, Charles University, Medical Faculty and Teaching Hospital, Sokolska Street 581, 500 05 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
P Zak4th Department of Internal Medicine-Hematology, Charles University, Medical Faculty and Teaching Hospital, Sokolska Street 581, 500 05 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Charles University · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs), still represent a certain mystery in biology, have a unique property of dividing into equal cells and repopulating the hematopoietic tissue. This potential enables their use in transplantation treatments. The quality of the HSC grafts for transplantation is evaluated by flow cytometric determination of the CD34(+) cells, which enables optimal timing of the first apheresis and the acquisition of maximal yield of the peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs). To identify a more efficient method for evaluating CD34(+) cells, we compared the following alternative methods with the reference method: hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPC) enumeration (using the Sysmex XE-2100 analyser), detection of CD133(+) cells, and quantification of aldehyde dehydrogenase activity in the PBSCs. 266 aphereses (84 patients) were evaluated. In the preapheretic blood, the new methods produced data that were in agreement with the reference method. The ROC curves have shown that for the first-day apheresis target, the optimal predictive cut-off value was 0.032 cells/mL for the HPC method (sensitivity 73.4%, specificity 69.3%). HPC method exhibited a definite practical superiority as compared to other methods tested. HPC enumeration could serve as a supplementary method for the optimal timing of the first apheresis; it is simple, rapid, and cheap.

Indexed as

AC133 AntigenAdultAgedAldehyde DehydrogenaseAntigens, CDAntigens, CD34FemaleFlow CytometryGlycoproteinsHematopoietic Stem CellsHumansLeukapheresisMaleMiddle AgedPeptidesReproducibility of ResultsAC133 AntigenAldehyde DehydrogenaseAntigens, CDAntigens, CD34GlycoproteinsPeptidesPROM1 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID25276799
PMCPMC4172884
OpenAlexW2037010627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.