Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27589849›Full record

ArticleJournal of hematology & oncology2016

Matched and mismatched unrelated donor compared to autologous stem cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia in first complete remission: a retrospective, propensity score-weighted analysis from the ALWP of the EBMT.

Francesco Saraceni, Myriam Labopin, Norbert-Claude Gorin, Didier Blaise, Reza Tabrizi, Liisa Volin, Jan Cornelissen, Jean-Yves Cahn, Patrice Chevallier, Charles Craddock and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of hematology & oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The role of mCell death discovery · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. [Advances in autologous stem cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia].Zhonghua xue ye xue za zhi = Zhonghua xueyexue zazhi · 2019
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

16 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.

Francesco SaraceniHematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation, Polytechnic University of Marche-Ospedali Riuniti Ancona, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy. francesco.saraceni@libero.it.
Myriam LabopinALWP-EBMT and Department of Hematology and Cell Therapy, Saint Antoine Hospital, Paris, France.
Norbert-Claude GorinALWP-EBMT and Department of Hematology and Cell Therapy, Saint Antoine Hospital, Paris, France.
Didier BlaiseProgramme de Transplantation et Therapie Cellulaire-Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille, France.
Reza TabriziCHU Bordeaux, Hôpital Haut-Leveque, Pessac, France.
Liisa VolinHUH, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Stem Cell Transplantation Unit, Helsinki, Finland.
Jan CornelissenErasmus MC-Daniel den Hoed Cancer Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jean-Yves CahnClinique Universitaire d'Hématologie CHU Grenoble, Grenoble, France.
Patrice ChevallierDepartment D'Hématologie, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
Charles CraddockCentre for Clinical Haematology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Depei WuDepartment of Hematology, First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Anne HuynhCHU Department Hématologie, Hôpital de Purpan, Toulouse, France.
William ArceseRome Transplant Network, Stem Cell Transplant Unit, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Mohamad MohtyALWP-EBMT and Department of Hematology and Cell Therapy, Saint Antoine Hospital, Paris, France.
Arnon NaglerChaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Acute Leukemia Working Party (ALWP) of the European society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT)
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble · FRHôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque · FRMarche Polytechnic University · ITQueen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham · GBUniversity of Rome Tor Vergata · ITErasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLInstitut Paoli-Calmettes · FRSheba Medical Center · ILSoochow University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOptimal post-remission strategy for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is matter of intense debate. Recent reports have shown stronger anti-leukemic activity but similar survival for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) from matched sibling donor compared to autologous transplantation (auto-HSCT); however, there is scarcity of literature confronting auto-HSCT with allo-HSCT from unrelated donor (UD-HSCT), especially mismatched UD-HSCT.

methodsWe retrospectively compared outcome of allogeneic transplantation from matched (10/10 UD-HSCT) or mismatched at a single HLA-locus unrelated donor (9/10 UD-HSCT) to autologous transplantation in patients with AML in first complete remission (CR1). A total of 2879 patients were included; 1202 patients received auto-HSCT, 1302 10/10 UD-HSCT, and 375 9/10 UD-HSCT. A propensity score-weighted analysis was conducted to control for disease risk imbalances between the groups.

resultsMatched 10/10 UD-HSCT was associated with the best leukemia-free survival (10/10 UD-HSCT vs auto-HSCT: HR 0.7, p = 0.0016). Leukemia-free survival was not statistically different between auto-HSCT and 9/10 UD-HSCT (9/10 UD-HSCT vs auto-HSCT: HR 0.8, p = 0.2). Overall survival was similar across the groups (10/10 UD-HSCT vs auto-HSCT: HR 0.98, p = 0.84; 9/10 UD-HSCT vs auto-HSCT: HR 1.1, p = 0.49). Notably, in intermediate-risk patients, OS was significantly worse for 9/10 UD-HSCT (9/10 UD-HSCT vs auto-HSCT: HR 1.6, p = 0.049), while it did not differ between auto-HSCT and 10/10 UD-HSCT (HR 0.95, p = 0.88). In favorable risk patients, auto-HSCT resulted in 3-year LFS and OS rates of 59 and 78 %, respectively.

conclusionsOur findings suggest that in AML patients in CR1 lacking an HLA-matched sibling donor, 10/10 UD-HSCT significantly improves LFS, but this advantage does not translate in better OS compared to auto-HSCT. In intermediate-risk patients lacking a fully HLA-matched donor, auto-HSCT should be considered as a valid option, as better survival appears to be provided by auto-HSCT compared to mismatched UD-HSCT. Finally, auto-HSCT provided an encouraging outcome in patients with favorable risk AML.

Indexed as

Blood DonorsTransplantation, AutologousAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHistocompatibilityHumansLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreRemission InductionRetrospective StudiesSiblingsAcute myeloid leukemia (AML)Allogeneic transplantationAutologous transplantationMatched (10/10) and mismatched (9/10) unrelated donor transplantationPost-remission therapy

Identifiers

PMID27589849
PMCPMC5009662
OpenAlexW2508605133

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.