Impact of HLA‐Mismatch in Unrelated Donor Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Meta‐Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The magnitude of risk associated with 9/10 mismatched unrelated donor (MMURD) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and that of mismatches at the individual HLA loci remain unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the difference in clinical outcomes between matched unrelated donor (MUD) and MMURD transplantation. A comprehensive search of Medline and Embase for manuscripts regarding transplantation outcomes in primarily adult patients with hematologic malignancies was performed. The pooled effect estimates were calculated using DerSimonian-Laird random effects models. A total of 13 studies were included, reporting on 13,446 transplants. 9/10 MMURD transplantation was associated with worse overall survival compared to 10/10 MUD transplantation (pooled HR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.12-1.45; n = 7 studies). Mismatch at HLA-A, -B, or -C was associated with significantly worse overall survival compared to MUD transplantation, while there was no significant difference associated with -DQ or -DPB1 mismatch. Inferior survival associated with HLA-DRB1 mismatch could not be ruled out. Data on acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease were scarce but favored MUD transplantation. In summary, this meta-analysis of the available literature favored MUD over MMURD transplantation in hematologic malignancies and further quantifies the risks associated with specific HLA-allele mismatches. Am. J. Hematol. 91:551-555, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".