Haploidentical Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Patients with Severe Aplastic Anemia—Single-Centre Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Severe aplastic anemia (SAA) is a life-threatening type of aplastic anemia for which allogeneic stem cell transplantation or immunosuppressive therapy are the principal treatment modalities. Only about 25-30% of patients have a matched sibling donor, and finding an unrelated donor in ethnic minorities is a challenge. The use of related haploidentical donor transplants in severe aplastic anemia is uncommon. We would like to report our experience with the first four patients who underwent haploidentical transplants for severe aplastic anemia. This is a retrospective study. We collected data from our transplant database of all haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplants for SAA from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021. The transplant protocol used was the Hopkins' protocol. There were three patients who underwent haploidentical transplants as primary therapy for SAA. A fourth patient received a haploidentical transplant after immunosuppressive therapy failure. The median age of the patients at transplant was 24 y (range 20-29). All patients were engrafted. Neutrophil engraftment occurred at a median of 21 days (range 17-22). Any active infections resolved with the recovery of blood counts. The median hospitalization time was 27 days (range 22-41). Only one patient had grade 2 acute GVHD involving the skin. There was no chronic GVHD. All patients had complete lymphoid and myeloid donor chimerism on day 60. Based on our experience and the emerging literature, haplo-identical transplantation should be considered for select young patients with SAA who have low chances of responding to immunosuppressive therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".