MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2560514258 · doi:10.1182/blood.v110.11.46.46

A Comparison of Stem Cell Source in Recipients of T-Cell Depleted Myeloablative Transplants for Leukaemia: No Difference in Mortality Using BM or PBSC.

2007· article· en· W2560514258 on OpenAlexaff
Bronwen E. Shaw, Nigel H. Russell, Antonio Pagliuca, Jane F. Apperley, Gordon Cook, Stephen Mackinnon, J. Alejandro Madrigal, D I Marks, Gareth J. Morgan, Karl S. Peggs, Mike Potter, K. Towlson, Jenny Byrne

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStem cellGraft-versus-host diseaseTransplantationBone marrowInternal medicineGastroenterologyImmunologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The use of GSCF-mobilised Peripheral Blood Stem Cells (PBSC) for unrelated donor (UD) transplantation has increased dramatically since 2000. The association of PBSC with more rapid engraftment and with an increase in chronic Graft versus Host Disease (GvHD), compared to bone marrow (BM) has been reported in a number of studies. More recently the use of PBSC has been associated with an increase in transplant related mortality (TRM) and decrease in survival (OS) in T-cell replete transplants. We sought to analyse the impact of PBSC compared to BM in a cohort of UD transplant recipients, where T-cell depleting agents (in-vivo campath in >90%) were included in the transplant conditioning. The study included 145 patients transplanted between January 2000 and March 2006: CML- 35 in 1CP; acute leukaemia (AML in 61, ALL in 49)-110 in CR1 or 2. All had myeloablative conditioning regimens and received grafts with 9–10/10 matched HLA alleles. 86 patients received BM and 59 PBSC. There were no associations between the stem cell source and any transplant variable (including disease and stage). There was a trend to an increased use of PBSC in patients with a single antigen mismatch (p=0.052). All evaluable patients achieved neutrophil engraftment, with a significantly faster time to engraft in recipients of PBSC compared to BM (16 vs 20 days; p=0.0003). The incidence of acute GvHD was 46% (grade I in 50%, II in 41%, III in 8%, IV in 2%). This was significantly higher in recipients of PBSC (60%) compared to BM (36%; p=0.006), however there was no increase in either II/IV (p=0.69) or III/IV (p=0.18) disease in PBSC recipients. In univariate analysis, the presence of a single HLA mismatch (p=0.026) was the only other variable to be associated with an increase in acute GvHD. In a logistic regression model including both these variables, the use of PBSC remained significantly associated with an increase in aGvHD (OR=2.3; 95% CI 1.1,4.7;p=0.020). The TRM was 14%, 27% and 39% at 100 days, 1 and 5 years respectively. At none of these time points was the stem cell source associated with a significant difference in TRM. The 5-year incidence of chronic GvHD was 58% (BM 55%, PBSC 60%; NS), extensive disease in one third, and of relapse was 61% (BM 60%, PBSC 62%; NS). The 5-years OS was 41% with a median follow-up of 3.4 years (0.5–7.1). This was 44% using PBSC and 40% using BM (NS). In conclusion, although we observed an increase in acute GVHD with PBSC this was only of grade 1 disease. We found no association between the use of PBSC and an increased risk of chronic GVHD or of a worse transplant outcome, when compared to BM, in recipients of T-cell depleted myeloablative transplants for leukaemia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation→French-language works237,207→