MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Bone Marrow Transplantation From HLA-Identical Sibling for Thalassemia.

2009· article· en· W2980000661 on OpenAlexaff
Mitchell Sabloff, Mammen Chandy, Zhiwei Wang, Brent R. Logan, Chi Kong Li, Syed Muhammad Irfan, Mary Eapen, Mark C. Walters

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThalassemiaBusulfanTransplantationPopulationInternal medicineBeta thalassemiaBone marrowPediatricsSurgeryHematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 3361 Poster Board III-249 Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) is curative treatment for β-Thalassemia major. The most extensive patient series have been reported by transplant teams in Italy. Outside these large groups, smaller, more limited series have reported variable results. Here we report the current experience of BMT for thalassemia outside Italy, and describe the characteristics and transplant outcomes in children after HLA-identical sibling BMT for thalassemia. Patients aged ≤20 years at BMT who received a myeloablative HLA-matched sibling BMT for thalassemia between 1995 and 2001 at 19 centers were eligible for the survey (n=179). Recipients of mobilized peripheral blood or umbilical cord blood stem cells, and reduced intensity transplant preparation were excluded as there were too few patients in each category for analysis. Also excluded were patients previously reported by the Italian centers. The median age at BMT was 7 years and the median follow-up of survivors was 6 years. Most recipients had high-risk features at BMT. The distribution of Lucarelli risk class I, II and III categories was 2%, 42%; and 36%, respectively. Data required to assign a risk category was not available for 20% of the study population. Before BMT, 85% had received ≥ 20 red blood cell transfusions. Of 87% who had a pre-BMT liver biopsy, 59% had portal fibrosis. There was hepatomegaly in 52% of patients and 94% had inadequate iron chelation therapy. All patients received busulfan and cyclophosphamide with or without anti-thymocyte globulin as the transplant conditioning regimen and almost all received cyclosporine-containing GVHD prophylaxis. The overall survival (OS) probabilities at 100 days and at 5 years were 85% and 80%, respectively. Seventeen patients (9.5%) had graft failure that was fatal in 11 cases. Six of 9 patients with graft failure survive after a successful second transplantation. Thirty-five patients (20%) died after BMT and the leading cause of death was interstitial pneumonitis in the current analysis. The probability of acute GVHD (grade II-IV) was 38% and the 5-year probability of chronic GVHD was 13%. Veno-occlusive disease (VOD) occurred frequently after BMT (n=58; 32% of patients) and 21 of the 35 (57%) patients who died after BMT had had a history VOD. A multivariate analysis showed that age at BMT ≥10 years (RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.1 – 4.23, p=0.025) and baseline hepatomegaly (RR 5.57, 95% CI 2.14 – 14.49, p<0.001) were associated with higher risk of mortality. The probabilities of disease-free survival (DFS) and OS are shown in the Table below. Younger patients without hepatomegaly fared the best and, older patients with hepatomegaly, the worst. This series confirms reports from large single center series that the results after HLA-matched sibling BMT for thalassemia major are optimized when performed in young children before the development of risk-factors for poor outcome. Pulmonary and hepatic complications were the leading cause of death in high-risk patients. 5-year OS 5-year DFS Age < 10 years without hepatomegaly 96% 93% Age < 10 years with hepatomegaly 73% 69% Age ≥ 10 years without hepatomegaly 86% 81% Age ≥ 10 years with hepatomegaly 53% 53% Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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