ArticleTransfusion2016
Remobilization of hematopoietic stem cells in healthy donors for allogeneic transplantation.
Article in Transfusion, 2016. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning-based prediction of G-CSF-induced hematopoietic stem cell mobilization outcomes in healthy volunteers.Bone marrow transplantation · 2025Article
- Addition of plerixafor in poorly mobilized allogeneic stem cell donors.Journal of clinical apheresis · 2022Article
- Machine learning-based scoring models to predict hematopoietic stem cell mobilization in allogeneic donors.Blood advances · 2022Article
- Shorter Interdonation Interval Contributes to Lower Cell Counts in Subsequent Stem Cell Donations.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2021Article
- Use of Plerixafor for Stem Cell Mobilization in the Setting of Autologous and Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantations: An Update.Journal of blood medicine · 2021Review
- AMD3100 redosing fails to repeatedly mobilize hematopoietic stem cells in the nonhuman primate and humanized mouse.Experimental hematology · 2021Article
- Donor-intrinsic variables determine mobilization efficiency: analyses from a cohort of sixty twice-mobilized stem cell donors.Journal of translational medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe need to repeat peripheral blood (PB) stem cell mobilization and collection in healthy donors arises infrequently but may be required due to insufficient initial collection, graft failure, or relapse of the recipient's disease. Little data exist on the efficacy of remobilization. Therefore, we retrospectively reviewed 18 years of remobilization records from healthy stem cell donors at our institution. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsWe identified 62 healthy donors who underwent remobilization, a cohort of 30 mobilized and remobilized with cytokines and a cohort of 32 mobilized with a CXCR4 antagonist and remobilized with cytokines. For each cohort we compared the PB CD34+/L level, the number of CD34+ cells collected/kg (recipient weight), and the number of CD34+ cells/L collected on the first day of leukapheresis during initial mobilization and remobilization.
resultsInitial mobilization with cytokines was associated with reduced remobilization. The mean PB CD34/L level at initial mobilization was 69 × 10(6) compared to 37 × 10(6) at remobilization (p = 0.029). In contrast, initial mobilization with a CXCR4 antagonist was not associated with reduced remobilization. The mean PB CD34/L level at initial mobilization was 15 × 10(6) compared to 68 × 10(6) at remobilization (p < 0.001). In both cohorts, initial mobilization results were positively correlated with remobilization results but the interval between was not.
conclusionsThis study suggests that poor remobilization yields may be due to decreased efficacy of cytokines after repeat exposure. The underlying mechanism of these findings remains unclear and further studies are needed.
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.