Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30149149›Full record

Trial reportBiology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation2019

KIR Donor Selection: Feasibility in Identifying better Donors.

Daniel Weisdorf, Sarah Cooley, Tao Wang, Elizabeth Trachtenberg, Michael D Haagenson, Cynthia Vierra-Green, Stephen Spellman, Ashley Spahn, Jenny Vogel, Hati Kobusingye and 11 more

Abstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Following Transplantation for Acute Myelogenous Leukemia, DonorJournal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Allele-LevelFrontiers in immunology · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

Daniel WeisdorfBlood and Marrow Transplant Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Electronic address: weisd001@umn.edu.
Sarah CooleyBlood and Marrow Transplant Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Tao WangDivision of Biostatistics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Elizabeth TrachtenbergChildren's Hospital of Oakland Research Institute, Oakland, California.
Michael D HaagensonCenter for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Milwaukee, WI & Minneapolis, MN.
Cynthia Vierra-GreenCenter for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Milwaukee, WI & Minneapolis, MN.
Stephen SpellmanCenter for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Milwaukee, WI & Minneapolis, MN.
Ashley SpahnCenter for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Milwaukee, WI & Minneapolis, MN.
Jenny VogelCenter for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Milwaukee, WI & Minneapolis, MN.
Hati KobusingyeCenter for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, Milwaukee, WI & Minneapolis, MN.
Todd FehningerWashington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
Ann WoolfreyFred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Steven DevineOhio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Maureen RossRoswell Park Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York.
Edmund K WallerEmory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Ronald SobecksCleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Peter ParhamStanford University, Stanford, California.
Lisbeth A GuethleinStanford University, Stanford, California.
Steven G E MarshAnthony Nolan Research Institute and UCL Cancer Institute, Royal Free Campus, London, United Kingdom.
Jeffrey MillerBlood and Marrow Transplant Program, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
participating center writing committee

Funding

Data Resource for Analyzing Blood &Marrow TransplantsU24CA076518 · NCI · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI Amy M Moskop, Bronwen Shaw · 1998 to 2026
$105.2M
Women's CancerP30CA077598 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI Douglas Yee · 1998 to 2026
$100.4M
Trial Design and Biostatistical Support CoreP01CA065493 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI Mark J Osborn · 1995 to 2026
$48.2M
Therapeutic Potential of Adaptive NK Cells in Cancer and TransplantationP01CA111412 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI MILLER, JEFFREY S. · 2005 to 2025
$38.2M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA065493NCI NIH HHS P01 CA111412NCI NIH HHS P30 CA077598NCI NIH HHS U24 CA076518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We previously reported that acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) transplants using killer cell immunoglobulin-type receptor (KIR) B haplotype better or best (≥2 B activating gene loci ± Cen B/B) unrelated donors (URDs) yield less relapse and better survival. In this prospective trial we evaluated 535 AML searches from 14 participating centers with centralized donor KIR genotyping for donor selection. This represented 3% to 48% of all AML searches (median 20%) per center, totaling 3 to 172 patients (median 22) per center. Donor KIR genotype was reported at a median of 14 days after request (≤26 days for 76% of searches). In 535 searches, 2080 donors were requested for KIR genotyping (mean 4.3 per search); and a median of 1.8 (range, 0 to 4.5) per search were KIR typed. Choosing more donors for confirmatory HLA and KIR haplotype identification enriched the likelihood of finding KIR better or best donors. The search process identified a mean of 30% KIR better or best donors; the success ranged from 24% to 38% in the 11 centers enrolling ≥8 patients. More donors requested for KIR genotyping increased the likelihood of identifying KIR better or best haplotype donors. Of the 247 transplants, 9.3% used KIR best, 19% used KIR better, and 48% used KIR neutral donors while 24% used a non-KIR-tested donor. KIR genotyping did not delay transplantation. The time from search to transplant was identical for transplants using a KIR-genotyped versus a non-KIR-genotyped donor. Prospective evaluation can rapidly identify KIR favorable genotype donors, but choosing more donors per search would substantially increase the likelihood of having a KIR best or better donor available for transplantation. Transplant centers and donor registries must both commit extra effort to incorporate new characteristics (beyond HLA, age, and parity) into improved donor selection. Deliberate efforts to present additional genetic factors for donor selection will require novel procedures.

Indexed as

Donor SelectionHaplotypesHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationUnrelated DonorsAdolescentAdultFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesReceptors, KIRReceptors, KIRAllogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantHLAKIRUnrelated donor selection

Identifiers

PMID30149149
PMCPMC6310641

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.