Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Extracorporeal Photopheresis for the Treatment of Steroid-Refractory Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• ECP results in favorable outcomes in SR-cGvHD, including OS, FFS and ORR. • At Month 12, the pooled OS rate was 83.97% for patients treated with ECP. • There was considerable heterogeneity across all analyses (I 2 : 65% to 91%). • Future research should aim to harmonize diagnostic and outcome criteria. The objective of this meta-analysis (MA) was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) for the treatment of steroid-refractory chronic graft-versus-host disease (SR-cGvHD). A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, followed by a feasibility assessment (FA) to assess potential between-study heterogeneity in the meta-analysis (MA). Random-effects MAs were performed for overall survival (OS), failure-free survival (FFS), overall response rate (ORR) and skin-specific response. A subgroup analysis was conducted to explore the effect of NIH assessment criteria. The SLR identified 627 records; 45 unique studies were ultimately included in the MA. For patients treated with ECP, at Month 12, the pooled OS rate was 83.97% and the pooled FFS rate was 60.79%. ORR was 45.34% at Months 3 to 4 and 58.23% at Months 6 to 8. Subgroup analyses showed no significant difference in ORR between studies utilizing NIH criteria and those utilizing non-NIH criteria. Skin-specific response was 34.86% at Months 2 to 3 and 54.22% at Months 4 to 6. There was considerable heterogeneity across all analyses, with I 2 values ranging from 65% to 91%. This SLR and MA indicates that ECP results in favorable outcomes in the treatment of SR-cGvHD, including OS, FFS and ORR.
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 | 0.015 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.044 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".