Modelling Improvements in Cell Yield of Banked Umbilical Cord Blood and the Impact on Availability of Donor Units for Transplantation into Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Umbilical cord blood (UCB) is used increasingly in allogeneic transplantation. The size of units remains limiting, especially for adult recipients. Whether modest improvements in the yield of cells surviving storage and thawing allow more patients to proceed to transplant was examined. The impact of improved cell yield on the number of available UCB units was simulated using 21 consecutive anonymous searches. The number of suitable UCB units was calculated based on hypothetical recipient weight of 50 kg, 70 kg, and 90 kg and was repeated for a 10%, 20%, and 30% increase in the fraction of cells surviving storage. Increasing the percentage of cells that survive storage by 30% lowered the threshold of cells needed to achieve similar engraftment rates and increased numbers of UCB units available for patients weighing 50 (P = 0.011), 70 (P = 0.014), and 90 kg (P = 0.003), controlling for differences in HLA compatibility. Moreover, if recipients were 90 kg, 12 out of 21 patients had access to at least one UCB unit that met standard criteria, which increased to 19 out of 21 patients (P = 0.035) when the fraction of cells surviving storage and thawing increased by 30%. Modest increases in the yield of cells in banked UCB units can significantly increase donor options for adult patients undergoing HSCT.
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".