ArticleBone marrow transplantation2022
A real-life overview of a hematopoietic cell transplant program throughout a four-year period, including prospective registry, exclusion causes and final donor selection.
Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
29 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traceability of patients who are candidates for Hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) is crucial to ensure HCT program quality. Continuous knowledge of both a detailed registry from a HCT program and final exclusion causes can contribute to promoting a real-life vision and optimizing patient and donor selection. We analyzed epidemiological data reported in a 4 year-monocentric prospective registry, which included all patients presented as candidates for autologous (Auto) and/or allogeneic (Allo) HCT. A total of 543 patients were considered for HCT: 252 (42.4%) for Allo and 291 (57.6%) for Auto. A total of 98 (38.9%) patients were excluded from AlloHCT due to basal disease progression more commonly (18.2%). Seventy-six (30.2%) patients had an HLA identical sibling, whereas 147 (58.3%) patients had only Haplo. UD research was performed in 106 (42%) cases, significantly more often in myeloid than lymphoid malignancies (57% vs 28.7%, p < 0.001) but 61.3% were finally canceled, due to donor or disease causes in 72.4%. With respect to Auto candidates, a total of 60 (20.6%) patients were finally excluded; progression was the most common cause (12%). Currently, Haplo is the most frequent donor type. The high cancellation rate of UD research should be revised to optimize further donor algorithms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34711917What 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.