ArticlePloS one2022
Risk stratification by 30-day prognostic factors of clinical outcomes after granulocyte transfusion in acute myeloid leukemia: A single-center retrospective study.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine Learning Predicts 30-Day Outcome among Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients: A Single-Center, Retrospective, Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Transfusion support in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.Blood research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGranulocyte transfusions (GTs) have been used to treat infections in neutropenic patients undergoing chemotherapy or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. However, there is persistent controversy regarding their outcomes. We aimed to analyze accumulated clinical and laboratory data from patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who underwent GT at our institution in the last 10 years to determine optimal parameters to estimate the GT effect. We hypothesized that patients grouped according to prognostic factors would have inconsistent clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this single-center retrospective study, we collected medical records of 219 GT-treated patients diagnosed with AML from 2009 to 2019. Prognostic factors, including clinical and laboratory parameters, were assessed. Serial measurements of laboratory parameters before and after GT were collected, and the area under the curve of the white blood cells (AUC-WBC) was calculated using the trapezoidal method. A prognostic scoring system using 8 factors from multivariate analysis was analyzed. The primary outcome was survival at 30 days (D30) after GT initiation.
resultsThe 8 factors for the prognosis scoring system included secondary AML, mean AUC-WBC, prothrombin time, and levels of blood urea nitrogen (BUN), bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), phosphorus, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Patients were grouped into 4 risk groups (low, medium, high, and very high), and the D30 survival rates for each group were as follows: 87.6% (99/113), 55.9% (33/59), 21.1% (4/19), and 0% (0/19), respectively. Hematopoiesis, liver, and renal function affected the outcome. FLT3 mutation acted as a favorable factor for D30 survival.
conclusionsGT response in patients with AML seemed to be reflected by 8 score markers, and GT was significantly effective in the low-risk group. We suggest that it is important to evaluate the risk assessment of patients before GT to achieve better outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.