Results of Unrelated Cord Blood Transplant in Fanconi Anemia Patients: Risk Factor Analysis for Engraftment and Survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We retrospectively analyzed results of unrelated cord blood transplantation (UCBT) in 93 Fanconi anemia (FA) patients. Median age at transplantation was 8.6 years (1-45). The units transplanted were HLA-A, -B, or -DRB1 identical in 12 cases, 1 HLA mismatch in 35 cases, and 2 or 3 HLA differences in 45 cases. The median number of nucleated cells (NC) and CD34+ cells infused of recipient weight was 4.9x10(7)/kg and 1.9x10(5)/kg, respectively. Participating centers selected the preparative regimen of their choice, in 57 patients (61%), it included Fludarabine. Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis consisted mostly of cyclosporine with prednisone. Cumulative incidence (CI) of neutrophil recovery was 60+/-5% at day +60. In multivariate analysis, Fludarabine containing regimen and NC infused>or=4.9x10(7)/kg were associated with higher probability of recovery. CI of grade II-IV acute and of chronic GVHD (aGVHD, cGVHD) was 32%+/-5% and 16%+/-4%, respectively. Overall survival (OS) was 40%+/-5%. In multivariate analysis, factors associated with favorable outcome were use of Fludarabine in the conditioning regimen, number of NC infused>or=4.9x10(7)/kg, and negative cytomegalovirus (CMV) serology in the recipient. In conclusion, factors easily modifiable such as donor selection and a Fludarabine-containing regimen can considerably improve survival in FA patients given a UCBT. These data are the basis for designing prospective protocols.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".