Low CD34 Dose Is Associated with Poor Survival after Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Allogeneic Transplantation for Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reduced-intensity conditioning/nonmyeloablative conditioning regimens are increasingly used in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Reports have shown CD34(+) dose to be important for transplantation outcome using myeloablative conditioning. The role of CD34(+) dose of peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC) has not been previously analyzed in a large population undergoing reduced-intensity conditioning/nonmyeloablative HCT. We studied 1054 patients, ages 45 to 75 years, with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome who underwent transplantation between 2002 and 2011. Results of multivariate analysis showed that PBPC from HLA-matched siblings containing <4 × 10(6) CD34(+)/kg was associated with higher nonrelapse mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 2.03; P = .001), overall mortality (HR, 1.48; P = .008), and lower neutrophil (odds ratio [OR], .76; P = .03) and platelet (OR, .76; P = .03) recovery. PBPC from unrelated donors with CD34(+) dose < 6 × 10(6) CD34(+)/kg was also associated with higher nonrelapse (HR, 1.38; P = .02) and overall mortality (HR, 1.20; P = .05). In contrast to reports after myeloablative HCT, CD34(+) dose did not affect relapse or graft-versus-host disease with either donor type. An upper cell dose limit was not associated with adverse outcomes. These data suggest that PBPC CD34(+) doses >4 × 10(6) CD34(+)/kg and >6 × 10(6) CD34(+)/kg are optimal for HLA-matched sibling and unrelated donor HCT, respectively.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".