Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36263054›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2022

Impact of natural killer cells on outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Muhammad Umair Mushtaq, Moazzam Shahzad, Amna Y Shah, Sibgha Gull Chaudhary, Muhammad U Zafar, Iqra Anwar, Karun Neupane, Ayesha Khalid, Nausheen Ahmed, Rajat Bansal and 6 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

16 authors.

Muhammad Umair MushtaqDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Moazzam ShahzadDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Amna Y ShahDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Sibgha Gull ChaudharyDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Muhammad U ZafarDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Iqra AnwarDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Karun NeupaneDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Ayesha KhalidDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Nausheen AhmedDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Rajat BansalDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Ramesh BalusuDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Anurag K SinghDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Sunil H AbhyankarDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.
Natalie S CallanderUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.
Peiman HemattiUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.
Joseph P McGuirkDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Natural killer (NK) cells play a vital role in early immune reconstitution following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Methods: A literature search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane, and Clinical trials.gov through April 20, 2022. We included 21 studies reporting data on the impact of NK cells on outcomes after HSCT. Data was extracted following the PRISMA guidelines. Pooled analysis was done using the meta-package (Schwarzer et al.). Proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed. Results: We included 1785 patients from 21 studies investigating the impact of NK cell reconstitution post-HSCT (8 studies/1455 patients), stem cell graft NK cell content (4 studies/185 patients), therapeutic NK cell infusions post-HSCT (5 studies/74 patients), and pre-emptive/prophylactic NK cell infusions post-HSCT (4 studies/77 patients). Higher NK cell reconstitution was associated with a better 2-year overall survival (OS) (high: 77%, 95%CI 0.73-0.82 vs low: 55%, 95%CI 0.37-0.72; n=899), however, pooled analysis for relapse rate (RR) or graft versus host disease (GVHD) could not be performed due to insufficient data. Higher graft NK cell content demonstrated a trend towards a better pooled OS (high: 65.2%, 95%CI 0.47-0.81 vs low: 46.5%, 95%CI 0.24-0.70; n=157), lower RR (high: 16.9%, 95%CI 0.10-0.25 vs low: 33%, 95%CI 0.04-0.72; n=157), and lower acute GVHD incidence (high: 27.6%, 95%CI 0.20-0.36 vs low: 49.7%, 95%CI 0.26-0.74; n=157). Therapeutic NK or cytokine-induced killer (CIK) cell infusions for hematologic relapse post-HSCT reported an overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) of 48.9% and 11% with CIK cell infusions and 82.8% and 44.8% with NK cell infusions, respectively. RR, acute GVHD, and chronic GVHD were observed in 55.6% and 51.7%, 34.5% and 20%, and 20.7% and 11.1% of patients with CIK and NK cell infusions, respectively. Pre-emptive donor-derived NK cell infusions to prevent relapse post-HSCT had promising outcomes with 1-year OS of 69%, CR rate of 42%, ORR of 77%, RR of 28%, and acute and chronic GVHD rates of 24.9% and 3.7%, respectively. Conclusion: NK cells have a favorable impact on outcomes after HSCT. The optimal use of NK cell infusions post-HSCT may be in a pre-emptive fashion to prevent disease relapse.

Indexed as

Graft vs Host DiseaseHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationCytokinesHumansKiller Cells, NaturalRecurrenceCytokinesallogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantationgraft versus host diseasehematologic malignanciesimmune reconstitutionviral infections

Identifiers

PMID36263054
PMCPMC9574024

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.