ArticleCancer2024
Incorporating patient-reported outcome data into a predictive calculator for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients.
Article in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal patient-reported outcomes and quality-of-life trajectories over 2 years in CAR-T therapy recipients.Blood neoplasia · 2026Trial
- The Clinical Utility of Real-Time Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cell Therapy Recipients.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2025Observational
- Assessing physical function in transplantation and CAR-T recipients: expert recommendations from the survivorship, aging and biobehavioral special interest groups of ASTCT.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2025Review
- Assessing Quality of Life and Symptoms in Transplantation and CAR-T Recipients: Expert Panel Recommendations from the Survivorship Special Interest Group of ASTCT.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) provides a 1-year overall survival calculator to estimate outcomes for individual patients before they undergo allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) to inform risk. The calculator considers pre-HCT clinical and demographic characteristics, but not patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Because pre-HCT PRO scores have been associated with post-HCT outcomes, the authors hypothesized that adding PRO scores to the calculator would enhance its predictive power.
methodsClinical data were obtained from the CIBMTR and the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network. The PRO measures used were the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplantation. One thousand thirty-three adult patients were included.
resultsWhen adjusted for clinical characteristics, the SF-36 physical component score was significantly predictive of 1-year survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.95; p = .0015), whereas the mental component score was not (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95-1.10; p = 0.6396). The baseline single general health question on the SF-36 was also significantly associated with mortality (HR, 1.91 for those reporting fair/poor health vs. good, very good, or excellent health; 95% CI, 1.33-2.76; p = .0005). The addition of PRO scores to the calculator did not result in a significant change in the model's predictive ability. Self-reported pre-HCT scores were strongly predictive of self-reported health status (odds ratio, 3.35; 95% CI, 1.66-6.75; p = .0007) and quality of life (odds ratio, 3.24; 95% CI, 1.93-5.41; p < .0001) after HCT.
conclusionsThe authors confirmed the significant, independent association of pre-HCT PRO scores with overall survival, although adding PRO scores to the survival calculator did not improve its performance. They also demonstrated that a single general health question was as accurate as the full measure for predicting survival, an important finding that may reduce respondent burden and promote its inclusion in routine clinical practice. Validation of these findings should be performed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.