MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321091149 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2023.1071268

Post-transplant cyclophosphamide versus anti-thymocyte globulin in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation from unrelated donors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4321091149 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lu Tang, Zhigang Liu, Tao Li, Tian Dong, Qiuhui Wu, Ting Niu, Ting Liu, Jie Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnti-thymocyte globulinInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)RegimenCyclophosphamideMeta-analysisHematopoietic stem cell transplantationTransplantationGraft-versus-host diseaseGastroenterologyImmunologyChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) and anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) are both common graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis strategies in allo-HSCT from unrelated donors. However, no consensus has reached on which regimen is optimal. Although several studies concerning this topic exist, the outcomes of different studies still conflict with each other. Therefore, an overall comparison of the two regimens is urgently needed to help make informed clinical decisions. Methods Studies comparing PTCy and ATG regimens in unrelated donor (UD) allo-HSCT were searched in four critical medical databases from inception to April 17, 2022. The primary outcome was grade II-IV aGVHD, grade III-IV aGVHD and chronic GVHD (cGVHD), and the secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), relapse incidence (RI), non-relapse mortality (NRM), and several severe infectious complications. The quality of articles was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), and data were extracted by two independent investigators and then analyzed by RevMan 5.4. Results Six out of 1091 articles were eligible for this meta-analysis. Compared with the ATG regimen, prophylaxis based on PTCy achieved a lower incidence of grade II-IV aGVHD incidence (RR=0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.93, P= 0.010, I 2 = 67%), grade III-IV aGVHD (RR=0.32, 95% CI 0.14-0.76, P =0.001, I 2 = 75%), NRM (RR=0.67, 95% CI 0.53-0.84, P =0.17, I 2 = 36%), EBV-related PTLD (RR=0.23, 95% CI 0.09-0.58, P =0.85, I 2 = 0%) and better OS (RR=1.29, 95% CI 1.03-1.62, P= 0.0001, I 2 = 80%). The cGVHD, RI, CMV reactivation and BKV-related HC showed no significant difference between the two groups (RR=0.66, 95% CI 0.35-1.26, P <0.00001, I 2 = 86%; RR=0.95, 95% CI 0.78-1.16, P =0.37, I 2 = 7%; RR=0.89, 95% CI 0.63-1.24, P =0.07, I 2 = 57%; RR=0.88, 95% CI 0.76-1.03, P =0.44, I 2 = 0%). Conclusion In the setting of unrelated donor allo-HSCT, prophylaxis based on PTCy can lower the incidence of grade II-IV aGVHD, grade III-IV aGVHD, NRM and EBV-related complication, achieve better OS compared to ATG-based regimen. And cGVHD, RI, CMV reactivation and BKV-related HC were comparable in the two groups.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.035
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationFrench-language works237,207