You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Impact of conditioning intensity in T-replete haplo-identical stem cell transplantation for acute leukemia: a report from the acute leukemia working party of the EBMT
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Hematology & Oncology, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13045-016-0248-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marie T. Rubio, Bipin N. Savani, Myriam Labopin, Simona Piemontese, Emmanuelle Polge, Fabio Ciceri, Andrea Bacigalupo, William Arcese, Yener Koc, Dietrich Beelen, Zafer Gülbas, Depei Wu, Stella Santarone, Johanna Tischer, Boris Afanasyev, Christoph Schmid, Sebastian Giebel, Mohamad Mohty, Arnon Nagler |
| Abstract |
Increasing numbers of patients are receiving haplo-identical stem cell transplantation (haplo-SCT) for treatment of acute leukemia with reduced intensity (RIC) or myeloablative (MAC) conditioning regimens. The impact of conditioning intensity in haplo-SCT is unknown. We performed a retrospective registry-based study comparing outcomes after T-replete haplo-SCT for patients with acute myeloid (AML) or lymphoid leukemia (ALL) after RIC (n = 271) and MAC (n = 425). Regimens were classified as MAC or RIC based on published criteria. A combination of post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PT-Cy) with one calcineurin inhibitor and mycophenolate mofetil (PT-Cy-based regimen) for graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis was used in 66 (25 %) patients in RIC and 125 (32 %) in MAC groups. Patients of RIC group were older and had been transplanted more recently and more frequently for AML with active disease at transplant. Percentage of engraftment (90 vs. 92 %; p = 0.58) and day 100 grade II to IV acute GVHD (24 vs. 29 %, p = 0.23) were not different between RIC and MAC groups. Multivariable analyses, run separately in AML and ALL, showed a trend toward higher relapse incidence with RIC in comparison to MAC in AML (hazard ratio (HR) 1.34, p = 0.09), and no difference in both AML and ALL in terms of non-relapse mortality (NRM) chronic GVHD and leukemia-free survival. There was no impact of conditioning regimen intensity in overall survival (OS) in AML (HR = 0.97, p = 0.79) but a trend for worse OS with RIC in ALL (HR = 1.44, p = 0.10). The main factor impacting outcomes was disease status at transplantation (HR ≥ 1.4, p ≤ 0.01). GVHD prophylaxis with PT-Cy-based regimen was independently associated with reduced NRM (HR 0.63, p = 0.02) without impact on relapse incidence (HR 0.99, p = 0.94). These data suggest that T-replete haplo-SCT with both RIC and MAC, in particular associated with PT-Cy, are valid options in first line treatment of high risk AML or ALL. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 8 | 21% |
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 58% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 January 2019.
All research outputs
#20,661,535
of 25,389,520 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#1,046
of 1,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,881
of 313,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#22
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,389,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,290 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,599 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.