Safety of Living Donation of Hematopoietic Stem Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More than 12 000 volunteer unrelated hematopoietic stem cell donations are undertaken annually, and the World Marrow Donor Association established an expert committee to examine all reports of adverse events affecting donors globally, eventually making such reporting a necessary part of World Marrow Donor Association accreditation. The committee evaluates and responds to reported events in a nonpunitive confidential process designed to alert the community of rare events which might be missed by local follow-up. Each report is evaluated by the committee for imputability (causal link between the donation and the adverse event) and compared with that submitted by the reporting registry. In 2014, there were 50 reports received from 16 different registries in 15 countries. There were 16 reports of malignancies arising in donors including 3 hematologic malignancies. All but 2 of the 16 occurred more than a year after donation. There were 4 reports of autoimmune phenomena in donors all occurring more than a year postdonation. Of the 30 remaining events, 6 were allergic, 4 cardiac, 3 gastrointestinal, 2 infections, 2 pulmonary, and 13 miscellaneous. Causation was assessed differently to the reporting registry in 17 events with 6 thought to be less likely causally linked to the donation and 10 more likely with 1 requiring more information. Volunteer unrelated hematopoietic stem cell donation is a safe and effective altruistic contribution to the treatment of patients with life-threatening hematologic disorders. A decade of detailed examination of adverse donor events has contributed to the safety of these donations.
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 | 0.030 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".