Farklı Hematopoetik Kök Hücre Kaynaklarının Koloni Colony Forming Unit-Assay Oluşturma Kapasitelerinin Karşılaştırılması
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is practiced successfully especially for hematologic malignancies. The source of hematopoietic stem cells for HSCT is bone marrow in allogeneic transplantation or peripheral blood stem cells after mobilization in autologous transplantation. The aim of this study is to investigate CFU-ASSAY results of two different hematopoietic stem cell sources. Method: Hematopoietic stem cells collected from bone marrow in 7 patients and peripheral blood in 7 patients were included in the study. Hematopoietic stem cells were cultured in semi-solid agar culture medium (Methocult, H 4434 Classic, Stem Cell Technologies, Canada) and CFU-ASSAY was performed after 14-18 day of culture period for each group. Results: CFU-Assay results of peripheral blood stem cells for autologous donors were as follows; CFUGM: 28.44x104/kg, BFU-E:40.7x104/kg, CFU-E:0.79x104/kg, CFU-GEMM :1.95x104/kg. CFU-Assay results of bone marrow stem cells for allogeneic donors were as follows; CFU-GM:7.03x104/kg, BFUE: 10.46x104/kg, CFU-E:0.16x104/kg, CFU-GEMM:0.51x104/kg. Conclusion: CFU-Assay results revealed that colony forming capacity of peripheral blood stem cells are higher than that of bone marrow stem cells. Peripheral blood stem cells transplantation is becoming more prevalent especially in adults. In pediatric groups, to identify the correlation between invitro results and clinical observations may help to increase preferance of peripheral blood stem cell transplantation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".