Trial reportBlood neoplasia2025
Outcomes of myeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation with omidubicel vs alternative donor sources.
Trial report in Blood neoplasia, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Omidubicel is a nicotinamide-expanded stem cell product derived from umbilical cord blood (UCB). In a phase 3 randomized trial for high-risk hematologic malignancies, omidubicel had faster neutrophil engraftment and fewer infectious complications than standard UCB transplantation. However, the clinical outcomes of omidubicel relative to other stem cell donor sources are yet to be determined. Clinical data for patients who underwent allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) with omidubicel and standard UCB were taken from the phase 3 trial. The Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) registry provided contemporaneous comparator cohorts of patients who met the trial eligibility criteria and who received allogeneic HCT from matched unrelated (MUD), mismatched unrelated (7/8 MMUD), and haploidentical donors. A total of 951 patients met the eligibility criteria, including 52 for omidubicel, 56 for standard UCB, 65 for 7/8 MMUD, 450 for MUD, and 328 for haploidentical donors. Omidubicel was associated with more rapid neutrophil engraftment than all other donor sources but slower platelet engraftment relative to other donor sources aside from UCB. There were no significant differences in overall survival, disease-free survival, and nonrelapse mortality among the donor sources. Omidubicel had a higher incidence of grade 2 to 4 acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), but similar rates of grade 3 to 4 acute GVHD and chronic GVHD compared to the CIBMTR cohorts. These results support the role of omidubicel as a viable donor source in the current transplant landscape.
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.