Routine filtration of hematopoietic stem cell products: the time has arrived
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most blood products are infused at the time of transfusion through a standard blood filter, designed to capture macroaggregates and cellular debris that might be harmful to the patient if infused. Hematopoietic stem cell products are not universally filtered, likely due to concern about loss of viable stem cells in the filtration process. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a two-phase study to better understand the safety of routine filtration. First, surplus cryopreserved stem cell products were thawed and filtered, with markers of viability and potency measured. Second, routine filtration was implemented as part of routine practice at our center, and date of neutrophil and platelet (PLT) recovery was compared to historical controls. RESULTS: In the first phase, there was no difference seen in any markers of viability or potency for products after routine filtration. Based on those results, routine filtration was implemented. There was no difference in neutrophil or PLT engraftment. Thus, in this study, routine filtration did not impact the number of viable stem cells and did not delay engraftment. CONCLUSION: Given the very real harm posed by infusion of macroaggregates and cellular debris, and no clear disadvantage to filtration, routine filtration of stem cell products should be considered the standard of care.
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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".