Unrelated Donor Status and High Donor Age Independently Affect Immunologic Recovery after Nonmyeloablative Conditioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is higher after HLA-matched unrelated donor (URD) than after HLA-matched related donor (MRD) nonmyeloablative hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). We therefore investigated factors affecting immune recovery in 94 patients given HCT from MRDs (n = 51) and URDs (n = 43) after 2-Gy total body irradiation with or without fludarabine and postgrafting immunosuppression with mycophenolate mofetil and cyclosporine. CD4 T cells counts remained below normal values during the first year after HCT in both patient groups. This included abnormally low counts each of naive CD4 T cells and memory CD4 T cells. Conversely, CD8 T cell counts reached the 10th percentile of normal 6 months after HCT in MRD and URD recipients. On day 30 after HCT, URD recipients had lower counts of B cells (P = .02), naive CD4 T cells (P = .04), memory CD4 T cells (P = .005), memory CD8 T cells (P = .005), and CMV-specific T helper cells (P = .007) than had MRD recipients. This delay in CMV-specific immune reconstitution translated into increased frequency of CMV antigenemia among URD recipients during the first 100 days after HCT. Older donor age was associated with low counts of naive CD4 T cells on days 180-365 after HCT (P = .003). Further, low numbers of T cells and CD34(+) cells in the graft and development of acute graft-versus-host disease were associated with impaired immune recovery of naive CD4 T cells and B cells. In summary, immunologic recovery was poor the first year after nonmyeloablative conditioning and was delayed among URD recipients in comparison with MRD recipients. Other factors significantly associated with delayed immune recovery were advanced donor age, low numbers of CD34 and T cells in the graft, and development of graft-versus-host disease.
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) | 0.000 | 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".