Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35242134›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2022

KIR in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: Need for a Unified Paradigm for Donor Selection.

Adèle Dhuyser, Alice Aarnink, Michaël Pérès, Jyothi Jayaraman, Neda Nemat-Gorgani, Marie Thérèse Rubio, John Trowsdale, James Traherne

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Biochemistry and biophysics reports · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Medulloblastoma: biology and immunotherapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. CD94-drivenFrontiers in immunology · 2025
    Article
  12. Feeder-cell-free system forFrontiers in immunology · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Adèle DhuyserHistocompatibility Laboratory, CHRU de Nancy, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France.
Alice AarninkHistocompatibility Laboratory, CHRU de Nancy, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France.
Michaël PérèsHistocompatibility Laboratory, CHRU de Nancy, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France.
Jyothi JayaramanDepartment of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Neda Nemat-GorganiDepartment of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Marie Thérèse RubioIMoPA6, UMR7365 CNRS, Université de Lorraine, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France.
John TrowsdaleDepartment of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
James TraherneDepartment of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
University of Cambridge · GBCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRCentre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Nancy · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) is a lifesaving therapy for hematological malignancies. For years, a fully matched HLA donor was a requisite for the procedure. However, new immunosuppressive strategies have enabled the recruitment of viable alternative donors, particularly haploidentical donors. Over 95% of patients have at least two potential haploidentical donors available to them. To identify the best haploidentical donor, the assessment of new immunogenetic criteria could help. To this end, the clinical benefit of KIR genotyping in aHSCT has been widely studied but remains contentious. This review aims to evaluate the importance of KIR-driven NK cell alloreactivity in the context of aHSCT and explain potential reasons for the discrepancies in the literature. Here, through a non-systematic review, we highlight how the studies in this field and their respective predictive models or scoring strategies could be conceptually opposed, explaining why the role of NK cells remains unclear in aHCST outcomes. We evaluate the limitations of each published prediction model and describe how every scoring strategy to date only partly delivers the requirements for optimally effective NK cells in aHSCT. Finally, we propose approaches toward finding the optimal use of KIR genotyping in aHSCT for a unified criterion for donor selection.

Indexed as

Donor SelectionHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansKiller Cells, NaturalReceptors, KIRTissue DonorsReceptors, KIRallogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT)alloreactivity potentialDonor selectionkiller immunoglobulin-like receptors (KIR)predictive model

Identifiers

PMID35242134
PMCPMC8886110
OpenAlexW4226407615

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.