Trial reportTransfusion2016
Preliminary evaluation of a highly automated instrument for the selection of CD34+ cells from mobilized peripheral blood stem cell concentrates.
Trial report in Transfusion, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Epithelium to Therapy: Transitional Cells in Lung Fibrosis.American journal of respiratory cell and molecular biology · 2025Review
- Closed-system manufacturing of therapeutic NK cells using automated cell enrichment and concentration processes enables scalable, robust and cost-effective solutions.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Lymphocyte expansion in bioreactors: upgrading adoptive cell therapy.Journal of biological engineering · 2021Review
- Optimal large-scale CD34+ enrichment from a leukapheresis collection using the clinimacs prodigy platform.Clinical case reports · 2020Article
- Chimeric Antigen Receptor Based Therapy as a Potential Approach in Autoimmune Diseases: How Close Are We to the Treatment?Frontiers in immunology · 2020Review
- Robust Selections of Various Hematopoietic Cell Fractions on the CliniMACS Plus Instrument.Clinical hematology international · 2019Article
- Prospective Evaluation of a Practical Guideline for Managing Positive Sterility Test Results in Cell Therapy Products.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2019Article
- Genetic Engineering and Manufacturing of Hematopoietic Stem Cells.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2017Review
- Bringing Neural Cell Therapies to the Clinic: Past and Future Strategies.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2017Review
- GMP-conformant on-site manufacturing of a CD133Stem cell research & therapy · 2017Article
- Automated Enrichment, Transduction, and Expansion of Clinical-Scale CD62LHuman gene therapy · 2016Article
- Automation of cellular therapy product manufacturing: results of a split validation comparing CD34 selection of peripheral blood stem cell apheresis product with a semi-manual vs. an automatic procedure.Journal of translational medicine · 2016Article
- Clinical manufacturing of CAR T cells: foundation of a promising therapy.Molecular therapy oncolytics · 2016Review
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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCell selection is an important part of manufacturing cellular therapies. A new highly automated instrument, the CliniMACS Prodigy (Miltenyi Biotec), was evaluated for the selection of CD34+ cells from mobilized peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) concentrates using monoclonal antibodies conjugated to paramagnetic particles. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsPBSCs were collected by apheresis from 36 healthy subjects given granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) or G-CSF plus plerixafor. CD34+ cells from 11 PBSC concentrates were isolated with the automated CliniMACS Prodigy and 25 with the semiautomated CliniMACS Plus Instrument.
resultsThe proportion of CD34+ cells in the selected products obtained with the two instruments was similar: 93.6 ± 2.6% for the automated and 95.7 ± 3.3% for the semiautomated instrument (p > 0.05). The recovery of CD34+ cells from PBSC concentrates was less for the automated than the semiautomated instrument (51.4 ± 8.2% vs. 65.1 ± 15.7%; p = 0.019). The selected products from both instruments contained few and similar quantities of platelets (PLTs) and red blood cells. The depletion of CD3+ cells was less with the automated instrument (4.34 ± 0.2 log depletion vs. 5.20 ± 0.35 log depletion; p < 1 × 10(-6) ). Removal of PLTs from PBSC concentrates by washing was associated with better CD34+ cell recovery. We explored the reasons for lower CD34+ cell recovery by the Prodigy and found that the nonselected cells for the Prodigy contained more PLTs than those for the CliniMACS Plus.
conclusionsCD34+ cells can be effectively selected from mobilized PBSC concentrates with the CliniMAC Prodigy, but the recovery of CD34+ cells and depletion of CD3+ cells was lower than with the semiautomated CliniMACS Plus Instrument.
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.