ArticleAmerican journal of hematology2025
Impact of Donor Type on Outcomes After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Myelofibrosis: A Study on Behalf of the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the EBMT.
Article in American journal of hematology, 2025. 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.
- Clonal Dynamics After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation from Related Donors: A Case Series.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Myelofibrosis: Evolving Indications, Conditioning Strategies, and Outcomes.Hematology reports · 2026Review
- Pre-transplant JAK-inhibition improves post-transplant outcome in myelofibrosis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of Donor Type on Outcomes After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Myelofibrosis: A Study on Behalf of the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the EBMT.American journal of hematology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Selecting the optimal donor is crucial for optimizing results of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). We analyzed outcomes based on donor type in 2809 myelofibrosis (MF) patients undergoing first allo-HCT between 2015 and 2021 at EBMT centers. Study outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), relapse, non-relapse mortality (NRM), engraftment, and graft-versus-host disease (GvHD). Four groups were compared: matched sibling donor (MSD, n = 742), matched unrelated donor (MUD, n = 1401), mismatched unrelated donor (MMUD, n = 379) and haploidentical donor (HD, n = 287). After a median follow-up of 33.5 months, 3-year OS rates were 65.8%, 61.5%, 53.2%, and 57.7% for MSD, MUD, MMUD, and HD, respectively. Multivariable analyses (MSD as reference) showed that donor type significantly correlated with OS (HR: 1.63 for MMUD, HR: 1.42 for HD), PFS (HR: 1.38 for MMUD), NRM (HR: 1.73 for MMUD, HR: 1.47 for HD), engraftment (HR: 0.72 for MMUD, HR: 0.40 for HD), grade 2-4 acute GvHD (HR: 1.53 for MUD, HR: 1.69 for MMUD, HR: 1.49 for HD), and extensive chronic GvHD (HR: 0.77 for MUD, HR: 0.65 for HD). Donor type was not associated with relapse risk. In patients over 60 years, correlations between donor type and outcomes were consistent with those in the overall study population. In summary, with current practices, MF patients receiving MSD or MUD grafts achieve comparable outcomes. In contrast, MMUD and HD transplants have worse OS due to increased NRM. MMUD transplants have a higher risk of GvHD than HD transplants, but this difference seems to disappear with post-transplant cyclophosphamide.
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.