Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26919388›Full record

ReviewTransfusion2016

How do I perform hematopoietic progenitor cell selection?

Scott T Avecilla, Cheryl Goss, Sharon Bleau, Jo-Ann Tonon, Richard C Meagher

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Transfusion, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. CRISPR Gene Editing of Hematopoietic Stem and Progenitor Cells.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  3. Evolution of Gene Therapy, Historical Perspective.Hematology/oncology clinics of North America · 2022
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Establishment of a cell processing laboratory to support hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy.Transfusion and apheresis science : official journal of the World Apheresis Association : official journal of the European Society for Haemapheresis · 2021
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Scott T AvecillaDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Cheryl GossDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Sharon BleauDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Jo-Ann TononDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Richard C MeagherDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Graft-versus-host disease remains the most important source of morbidity and mortality associated with allogeneic stem cell transplantation. The implementation of hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) selection is employed by some stem cell processing facilities to mitigate this complication. Current cell selection methods include reducing the number of unwanted T cells (negative selection) and/or enriching CD34+ hematopoietic stem/progenitors (positive selection) using immunomagnetic beads subjected to magnetic fields within columns to separate out targeted cells. Unwanted side effects of cell selection as a result of T-cell reduction are primary graft failure, increased infection rates, delayed immune reconstitution, possible disease relapse, and posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease. The Miltenyi CliniMACS cell isolation system is the only device currently approved for clinical use by the Food and Drug Administration. It uses magnetic microbeads conjugated with a high-affinity anti-CD34 monoclonal antibody capable of binding to HPCs in marrow, peripheral blood, or umbilical cord blood products. The system results in significantly improved CD34+ cell recoveries (50%-100%) and consistent 3-log CD3+ T-cell reductions compared to previous generations of CD34+ cell selection procedures. In this article, the CliniMACS procedure is described in greater detail and the authors provide useful insight into modifications of the system. Successful implementation of cell selection procedures can have a significant positive clinical effect by greatly increasing the pool of donors for recipients requiring transplants. However, before a program implements cell selection techniques, it is important to consider the time and financial resources required to properly and safely perform these procedures.

Indexed as

Antigens, CD34Graft vs Host DiseaseHematopoietic Stem CellsHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansImmunomagnetic SeparationAntigens, CD34

Identifiers

PMID26919388
PMCPMC4934655
OpenAlexW2275103111

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.