ArticleLeukemia2026
Haploidentical versus matched unrelated donor transplantation with post-transplant cyclophosphamide: a platform-dependent machine learning analysis of donor age.
Article in Leukemia, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation with post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy), clinicians frequently face a critical choice between a readily available, often younger, haploidentical and a fully matched unrelated donor (MUD). The platform-specific influence of donor age on survival is a critical, unquantified factor that complicates clinical decision-making. We retrospectively analyzed 4258 adult patients with acute leukemia who underwent first allogeneic HCT with PTCy (2017-2021). We employed machine learning (Random Survival Forests and DeepSurv) alongside robust regression models, including Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting, 1:1 Propensity Score Matching, and Elastic-Net penalized Cox regression. Machine learning models revealed a divergent association of donor age with survival depending on donor type. The MUD-PTCy platform proved remarkably resilient; a 1% absolute increase in mortality risk (equivalent to Number-Needed-to-Harm of 100) did not emerge in donors up to age 50. In stark contrast, the age-sensitive Haploidentical cohort reached this same risk threshold at a donor age of just 38 years. MUD-PTCy was independently associated with a significant overall survival advantage (Adjusted Hazard Ratio 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.97; P = 0.01). This analysis provides a quantitative framework to guide the trade-off between HLA matching and donor age, supporting individualized decision-making and a rationale to reconsider restrictive donor age policies.
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.