ArticleClinical transplantation and research2025
Comparing drug combinations for graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis using the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System.
Article in Clinical transplantation and research, 2025. 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
Background: Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a severe complication for transplant patients, particularly those undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Although various GVHD prophylaxis drug combinations are administered in clinical settings, previous studies have primarily focused on monotherapies or limited drug combinations. Methods: We analyzed data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System for patients receiving GVHD prophylaxis drugs between January 2004 and March 2024. Efficacy was evaluated based on the recorded occurrence or nonoccurrence of GVHD following the administration of prophylactic drugs. Drug combinations were compared using the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and adjusted ROR (aROR), which were calculated through univariate and multivariate binomial logistic regression analyses, respectively. The aROR controlled for differences in patient backgrounds. Results: This study identified 10 GVHD prophylaxis drug combinations with aROR values significantly less than 1, indicating high effectiveness, and 13 combinations with aROR values significantly greater than 1, representing low effectiveness. Conclusions: The results demonstrated that certain GVHD prophylaxis drug combinations, particularly those including cyclosporine, may be relatively ineffective. However, avoiding cyclosporine is not always feasible in clinical settings, where treatment plans must be tailored to each patient. To address this issue, the study also identified cyclosporine-containing drug combinations that exhibit high efficacy. These findings could help inform the development of personalized treatment strategies for GVHD prophylaxis and thus improve outcomes in patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
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.