Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36470579›Full record

ArticleTransplantation and cellular therapy2023

HLA Factors versus Non-HLA Factors for Haploidentical Donor Selection.

Rohtesh S Mehta, Kai Cao, Rima M Saliba, Gheath Al-Atrash, Amin M Alousi, Konstantinos Lontos, Curtis Marcoux, Yudith Carmazzi, Gabriela Rondon, Qaiser Bashir and 12 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transplantation and cellular therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Optimizing Haploidentical Donor Selection for Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Transplant.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

22 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rohtesh S MehtaDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: rmehta@fredhutch.org.
Kai CaoDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Rima M SalibaDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Gheath Al-AtrashDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Amin M AlousiDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Konstantinos LontosDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Curtis MarcouxDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Yudith CarmazziDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Gabriela RondonDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Qaiser BashirDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Chitra M HosingDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Partow KebriaeiDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Issa KhouriDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
David MarinDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Yago NietoDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Betul OranDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Uday R PopatDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Muzaffar H QazilbashDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Jeremy RamdialDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Katayoun RezvaniDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Richard E ChamplinDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Elizabeth J ShpallDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When multiple haploidentical donors are available for transplantation, those of younger generations are generally selected over those of older generations. However, it is unclear who is the optimal donor when selecting candidates from within a generation, such as father versus mother, son versus daughter, or brother versus sister. Although traditionally male donors are favored over female donors, particularly for male recipients, and significant associations of individual HLA mis(matches) on outcomes are being increasingly recognized, the hierarchy of factors for donor selection is indeterminate. To assess whether HLA factors take precedence over non-HLA factors and to isolate the influence of specific characteristics on outcomes, we analyzed 412 patients stratified by donor relationship: child donor (son [n = 202] versus daughter [n = 96]), parent (father [n = 28] versus mother [n = 29]), and sibling (noninherited maternal [NIMA; n = 29] versus paternal [NIPA; n = 28] mismatched). Among siblings, NIMA mismatch was associated with a lower risk of acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD); B-leader mismatch was associated with high nonrelapse mortality (NRM), poor progression-free survival, and a trend toward poor overall survival (OS), whereas A-mismatch was associated with lower aGVHD. Among parent donors, the relationship did not impact any outcome; B-leader mismatch was associated with higher NRM and a trend toward poor OS, whereas A-mismatch was associated with lower NRM and improved progression-free survival and OS. Among child donors, no individual HLA mismatch was predictive of any outcome, and daughter donors were not associated with any adverse outcomes in multivariate analyses. Our data suggest that certain HLA factors may be more significant in some cases and should be given priority over simply selecting a donor based on relationship/sex.

Indexed as

Graft vs Host DiseaseHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationChildDonor SelectionFemaleHumansMaleMothersTissue DonorsDonor ageDonor sexFather versus motherHLA A-mismatchHLA B-leader mismatchHLA haploidentical donorNoninherited maternal antigenNoninherited paternal antigenPost-transplantation cyclophosphamideSex mismatchSon versus daughter

Identifiers

PMID36470579
PMCPMC10125001
OpenAlexW4310777412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.