Tacrolimus versus Cyclosporine after Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Acquired Aplastic Anemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Combinations of cyclosporine (CSP) with methotrexate (MTX) have been widely used for immunosuppression after allogeneic transplantation for acquired aplastic anemia. We compared outcomes with tacrolimus (TAC)+MTX versus CSP+MTX after transplantation from HLA-identical siblings (SIB) or unrelated donors (URD) in a retrospective cohort of 949 patients with severe aplastic anemia. Study endpoints included hematopoietic recovery, graft failure, acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), chronic GVHD, and mortality. TAC+MTX was used more frequently in older patients and, in recent years, in both SIB and URD groups. In multivariate analysis, TAC+MTX was associated with a lower risk of mortality in URD recipients and with slightly earlier absolute neutrophil count recovery in SIB recipients. Other outcomes did not differ statistically between the 2 regimens. No firm conclusions were reached regarding the relative merits of TAC+MTX versus CSP+MTX after hematopoietic cell transplantation for acquired aplastic anemia. Prospective studies would be needed to determine whether the use of TAC+MTX is associated with lower risk of mortality in URD recipients with acquired aplastic anemia.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".