Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41986623›Full record

ArticleLeukemia2026

Haploidentical versus matched unrelated donor transplantation with post-transplant cyclophosphamide: a platform-dependent machine learning analysis of donor age.

Rohtesh S Mehta, Christopher G Kanakry, Mariam Nawas, Aleksandr Lazaryan, Jennifer A Kanakry, Shernan Holtan, Taha Al-Juhaishi, Joseph Cataquiz Rimando, Anurag Singh, Jennifer Saultz and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Rohtesh S MehtaUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. rmehta1@mdanderson.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8532-544X
Christopher G KanakryNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7736-2056
Mariam NawasUniversity of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Aleksandr LazaryanMoffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9605-6436
Jennifer A KanakryMedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9522-3618
Shernan HoltanRoswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5054-9419
Taha Al-JuhaishiOU Health Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma, OK, USA.
Joseph Cataquiz RimandoEmory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Anurag SinghKansas University Medical Center, Kansas, KS, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1114-9508
Jennifer SaultzOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0024-9466
Shannon R MccurdyUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2813-6781
Filippo MilanoFred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3573-2159

Funding

Data Resource for Analyzing Blood &Marrow TransplantsU24CA076518 · NCI · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI Amy M Moskop, Bronwen Shaw · 1998 to 2026
$105.2M
NCI NIH HHS U24 CA076518
6 · The paper itself

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

CyclophosphamideHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationLeukemiaMachine LearningTransplantation, HaploidenticalUnrelated DonorsAdultAge FactorsFemaleGraft vs Host DiseaseHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTransplantation ConditioningTransplantation, HomologousCyclophosphamide

Identifiers

PMID41986623
PMCPMC13148988

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.