SynthesisCell transplantation
Haploidentical Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Versus Umbilical Cord Blood Transplantation in Hematologic Malignancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Cell transplantation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Donor-specific transplant outcomes from BMT CTN 1702: a multicenter prospective biologic assignment trial.Blood advances · 2026Trial
- Validated clinical risk score for acute graft-versus-host disease in adult allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Reduced-intensity post-cyclophosphamide-based graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis for umbilical cord blood transplantation: a single-center pilot study.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- The Cox Model With Adaptive Fused Group Bridge Penalty to Incorporate Historical Data Into the Analysis of Clinical Trials With an Application to BMT CTN 1101.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Cord blood transplantation for adult mature lymphoid neoplasms in Europe and Japan.Blood advances · 2024Article
- Haploidentical versus Double-Cord Blood Stem Cells as a Second Transplantation for Relapsed Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Cancers · 2023Article
- In 2022, which is preferred: haploidentical or cord transplant?Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2022Article
- Current status and prospects of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in China.Chinese medical journal · 2022Review
- Haploidentical Stem Cell Transplantation for Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Current Therapies, Challenges and Future Prospective.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (Haplo-SCT) and umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) are two important alternatives when a matched sibling donor is unavailable. Several studies have reported inconsistent clinical outcomes comparing Haplo-SCT and UCBT. Therefore, it is necessary to synthesize the existing evidence regarding outcomes of stem cell transplantations comparing Haplo-SCT with UCBT. We searched article titles that compared transplantation with Haplo-SCT and UCBT in MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane library, and EMBASE database. To compare clinical outcomes between Haplo-SCT and UCBT, we performed a meta-analysis of 12 studies and reported the pooled odds ratios (ORs) of 6 end points including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), nonrelapse mortality (NRM), relapse rate (RR), acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD), and chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD). We found that Haplo-SCT was associated with a significantly superior OS (pooled OR of 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 0.80) and PFS (0.77, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.83), as well as a lower NRM (0.72, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.80) and aGVHD (0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98) compared to the UCBT group. We also found a significantly increased risk of cGVHD in Haplo-SCT group (1.40, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.62). In terms of RR, Haplo-SCT was comparable to UCBT (0.91, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.05). Results of this meta-analysis demonstrate that Haplo-SCT results in better clinical outcomes compared to UCBT in terms of OS, PFS, TRM, and aGVHD, but is inferior to UCBT in terms of increased cGVHD risk. Further prospective comparisons between Haplo-SCT and UCBT 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.