Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36149441›Full record

ReviewInnere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany)2022

[Relevance of clonal hematopoiesis for cellular therapies].

Raphael Teipel, Malte von Bonin, Friedrich Stölzel, Johannes Schetelig, Christian Thiede, Martin Bornhäuser

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
In one paragraph

Review in Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Raphael TeipelMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik 1, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus an der TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland.
Malte von BoninMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik 1, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus an der TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland.
Friedrich StölzelMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik 1, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus an der TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland.
Johannes ScheteligMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik 1, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus an der TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland.
Christian ThiedeMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik 1, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus an der TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland.
Martin BornhäuserMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik 1, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus an der TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland. martin.bornhaeuser@ukdd.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The detection of clonal hematopoiesis (CH) in patients with hematologic neoplasms who are undergoing a cellular therapy is common. The most frequently used cellular therapy procedures include autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and, more recently, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T‑cell therapy. All three procedures differ fundamentally in terms of harvesting and manufacturing aspects as well as usage of the respective cell product. Therefore, the importance of CH in relation to the respective treatment method must be evaluated and assessed differently. In autologous HSCT, the extent of previous cytotoxic therapy significantly contributes to the high prevalence of CH. The clinically most important aspect is the development of secondary neoplasms from a pre-existing CH clone and the potential risk for enhanced cardiovascular side effects. In allogeneic HSCT, the donor selection with respect to the age largely determines the probability for the presence of CH. In this setting, the development of secondary malignancies only plays a minor role compared to the autologous HSCT. In fact, the induction of a graft versus host (GvH) or a graft versus leukemia (GvL) effect and its influence on progression-free and overall survival seem to be of possible clinical relevance. The CAR T‑cell therapy is closely linked to inflammatory reactions regarding its mode of action and the associated side effects. In this context CH might be closely linked to the effectiveness and side effects of the CAR T‑cell therapy. Initial data reported a high prevalence of CH in patients before CAR T‑cell therapy and indicated an increased rate of inflammatory side effects, although no negative effect on survival has yet been demonstrated.

Indexed as

Graft vs Host DiseaseHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationReceptors, Chimeric AntigenClonal HematopoiesisHumansT-LymphocytesTransplantation, HomologousReceptors, Chimeric AntigenCAR T‑cell therapyInflammationNeoplasms/secondaryStem cell transplantation, allogeneicStem cell transplantation, autologous

Identifiers

PMID36149441
PMCPMC9606068

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.