Impact of Race and Ethnicity on Outcomes After Umbilical Cord Blood Transplantation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Umbilical cord blood transplant (UCBT) improves access to transplant for patients lacking a fully matched donor. Previous Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) showed that Black patients had a lower overall survival (OS) than White patients following single UCBT. The current study draws on a larger modern cohort and compares outcomes among White, Latinx, Black, and Asian patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes by social determinants of health. STUDY DESIGN: We designed a retrospective study using CIBMTR data. US patients were between ages 1 and 80; 983 received single and 1529 double UCBT as reported to CIBMTR, following either a myeloablative (N = 1752) or reduced intensity conditioning (N = 759) for acute myeloid leukemia, acute lymphoid leukemia, or myelodysplasia. The primary outcome was 2-year OS. Secondary outcomes included disease free survival, transplant related mortality (TRM), acute and chronic graft vs host disease (GVHD), and GVHD free, relapse free survival (GRFS). RESULTS: For 1705 adults, in univariate analysis, 2-year OS was 41.5% (99% CI, 37.6 to 45.3) for Whites, 36.1% (99% CI, 28.2 to 44.5) for Latinx, 45.8% (99% CI, 36.7 to 55.1) for Blacks, and 44.5% (99% CI, 33.6 to 55.6) for Asians. In multivariate analysis of adults, Latinx patients had inferior OS compared to black patients (p = .0005, HR 1.45, 99% CI 1.18 to 1.79). OS improved over time for all racial/ethnic groups. GVHD rates were comparable among the different racial/ethnic groups. In the 807 children, the 2-year OS in univariate analysis was 66.1% (99% CI, 59.7 to 72.2) for Whites, 57.1% (99%CI, 49 to 64.9) for Latinx, 46.8% (99%CI, 35.3 to 58.4) for Blacks, and 53.8% (99%CI, 32.7 to 74.2) for Asians. In multivariate analysis, no difference in OS was observed among racial/ethnic groups (p = .051). Grade III/IV acute GVHD was higher in Blacks compared with Whites (p = .0016, HR 2.25, 99% CI 1.36 to 3.74) and Latinx (p = .0016, HR 2.17, 99% CI 1.43 to 3.30). There was no survival advantage to receiving a UCB unit from a donor of similar race and ethnicity, for any racial/ethnic groups, for both children and adults. Black and Latinx adult patients were more likely to live in areas defined as high poverty. Patients from high poverty level areas had worse OS (p = .03), due to a higher rate of TRM (p=0.04). Educational level, and type of insurance did not impact overall survival, GVHD, TRM or other transplant outcomes. Children from areas with a higher poverty level had higher TRM, regardless of race and ethnicity (p = .02). Public health insurance, such as Medicaid, was also associated with a higher TRM (p = .02). However, poverty did not impact pediatric OS, DFS, or other post-transplant outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: OS for UCBT has improved over time. In adults, OS is comparable among Whites, Blacks, and Asians and lower for Latinx patients. In children, OS is comparable among Whites, Blacks, Latinx, and Asians, but Grade III/IV acute GVHD was higher in Black patients. There was no survival benefit to matching UCB unit and patient by race and ethnicity for adults and children.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».