Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33303730›Full record

ArticleAnnals of transplantation2020

Outcomes of Non-Cryopreserved Versus Cryopreserved Peripheral Blood Stem Cells for Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma.

Pokpong Piriyakhuntorn, Adisak Tantiworawit, Thanawat Rattanathammethee, Sasinee Hantrakool, Chatree Chai-Adisaksopha, Ekarat Rattarittamrong, Lalita Norasetthada

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of transplantation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pokpong PiriyakhuntornDivision of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Adisak TantiworawitDivision of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Thanawat RattanathammetheeDivision of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Sasinee HantrakoolDivision of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Chatree Chai-AdisaksophaDivision of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Ekarat RattarittamrongDivision of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Lalita NorasetthadaDivision of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Chiang Mai University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has become a standard procedure in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Cryopreservation (CRYO) of stem cells may be associated with adverse reactions of dimethyl sulfoxide. Previous studies showed that stem cell storage at 4°C (non-cryopreserved [NC] method) may have some advantages. This analysis focused on comparing the transplant-related outcomes of the 2 preservation methods. MATERIAL AND METHODS This was a cohort study of consecutive MM patients who underwent ASCT at Chiang Mai University from 2014 to 2019. Primary outcomes were time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment. Key secondary outcomes were the incidence of infusion reactions, duration of hospitalization, cost, and survival. RESULTS A total of 42 MM patients underwent ASCT. Of these, 26 patients and 16 patients underwent NC and CRYO stem cell collections, respectively. There was no difference in time to neutrophil engraftment (median 12 vs. 10.5 days, P=0.203) or platelet engraftment (median 14 vs. 12 days, P=0.809) between groups. The incidence of infusion reactions and duration of hospitalization were similar in both groups. The average cost of ASCT was 10% lower in the NC group. There was no difference in progression-free survival (median 16 vs. 22 months, P=0.701) or overall survival between NC and CRYO groups. CONCLUSIONS ASCT in MM using the NC preservation method is effective and safe compared to the CRYO method in both short-term and survival outcomes.

Indexed as

CryopreservationMultiple MyelomaPeripheral Blood Stem CellsPeripheral Blood Stem Cell TransplantationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTransplantation, Autologous

Identifiers

PMID33303730
PMCPMC7737409
OpenAlexW3112238828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.