ReviewPatient preference and adherence2024
Omidubicel for Hematopoietic Cell Transplants: Considerations for Patients and Treatment Outcomes.
Review in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For patients with hematologic malignancies requiring allogeneic stem cell transplantation, alternative donor sources are needed when lacking access to a matched related or unrelated donor. Umbilical cord blood (UCB) has been an important alternative allograft donor source for these patients; however, several limitations exist. Omidubicel is a nicotinamide modified allogeneic hematopoietic progenitor cell therapy derived from UCB. Omidubicel was approved in May 2023 by the United States Food and Drug Administration based on the results of a Phase III trial comparing it to UCB transplantation in patients with high-risk hematologic malignancies. Median time to neutrophil engraftment was faster with omidubicel compared to UCB transplantation (12 days vs 22 days; p<0.001). There was also a lower incidence of grade 2/3 bacterial or invasive fungal infections with omidubicel compared to UCB transplantation (37% vs 57%; p=0.027). From a safety perspective, omidubicel has a boxed warning due to the risk of life-threatening infusion reactions, graft-versus-host disease, graft failure, and engraftment syndrome. Omidubicel represents an important advancement in developing novel alternative allograft donor sources. This also has important implications in ensuring access to alternative donor sources for ethnic and minority populations.
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.