Recovery of Unrelated Donors of Peripheral Blood Stem Cells versus Recovery of Unrelated Donors of Bone Marrow: A Prespecified Analysis from the Phase III Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network Protocol 0201
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report a comparison of time to recovery, side effects, and change in blood counts from baseline to after donation from unrelated donors who participated in the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network phase III randomized, multicenter trial (0201) in which donor-recipient pairs were randomized to either peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) or bone marrow (BM) donation. Of the entire cohort, 262 donated PBSC and 264 donated BM; 372 (71%) donors were from domestic and 154 (29%) were from international centers (145 German and 9 Canadian). PBSC donors recovered in less time, with a median time to recovery of 1 week compared with 2.3 weeks for BM donors. The number of donors reporting full recovery was significantly greater for donors of PBSC than of BM at 1, 2, and 3 weeks and 3 months after donation. Multivariate analysis showed that PBSC donors were more likely to recover at any time after donation compared with BM donors (hazard ratio, 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.73 to 2.50; P < .001). Other characteristics that significantly increased the likelihood of complete recovery were being an international donor and donation in more recent years. Donors of BM were more likely to report grades 2 to 4 skeletal pain, body symptoms, and fatigue at 1 week after donation. In logistic regression analysis of domestic donors only in which toxicities at peri-collection time points (day 5 filgrastim for PBSC donors and day 2 after collection of BM donors) could be analyzed, no variable was significantly associated with grades 2 to 4 skeletal pain, including product donated (BM versus PBSC; odds ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, .74 to 1.74; P = .556). Blood counts were affected by product donated, with greater mean change from baseline to after donation for white blood cells, neutrophils, mononuclear cells, and platelets in PBSC donors whereas BM donors experienced a greater mean change in hemoglobin. This analysis provided an enhanced understanding of donor events as product donated was independent of physician bias or donor preference.
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 | 0.028 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".