ライフサイエンスコーパス: related donor

1 mochromatosis patients vs 1.6% of non-health-related donors).

2 and 39.0%, respectively (62.0% and 41.5% for related donors).

3 oietic-cell transplant do not have a matched related donor.

4 ic stem cell transplant from her HLA-matched related donor.

5 at 5 years as that of a graft from a living related donor.

6 igible for transplant but without a suitable related donor.

7 e from a cadaver, and 14% were from a living-related donor.

8 d an HLA-identical or one-antigen-mismatched related donor.

9 e: the haploidentical, partially mismatched, related donor.

10 and had an available 8/8 or 7/8 HLA-matched related donor.

11 nonhuman leukocyte antigen identical living-related donor.

12 ls with leukemia or lymphoma and no suitable related donor.

13 matopoietic stem cell transplantation from a related donor.

14 fully human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched related donor.

15 ge-related decline that may be more rapid in related donors.

16 (HCT) from unrelated donors as compared with related donors.

17 We performed six SPKs from living-related donors.

18 ed unrelated donors and partially mismatched related donors.

19 r concerns are important to potential living related donors.

20 n be cured by stem cell transplantation from related donors.

21 be the same as the standards for emotionally related donors.

22 is patients and 50 079 (95.1%) as non-health-related donors.

23 arrow transplantation (alloBMT) from matched related donors.

24 and human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-mismatched related donors.

25 ved grafts from unrelated donors and 14 from related donors.

26 h acquired aplastic anemia who have matched, related donors.

27 d to better outcomes after partially matched related donors.

28 the likelihood of depression diagnosis among related donors.

29 om HLA-haploidentical and 3 from HLA-matched related donors.

30 k of complications, even with haploidentical related donors.

31 I], 1.08-1.74) after donor nephrectomy among related donors.

32 nificant among white but not among non-white related donors.

33 aHR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.28-3.55; P=0.003) among related donors.

34 ing human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-mismatched related donors.

35 loBMT and increase the use of HLA-mismatched related donors.

36 Significantly fewer black children had related donors.

37 cent of patients had unrelated or mismatched related donors.

38 y graft survival rates equivalent to that of related donors.

39 ipients of 50% segmental grafts from living, related donors?

40 Forty-two patients (pts) (65%) had match related donors, 18 (27%) match unrelated, 1 (1.5%) misma

41 pheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) from matched-related donors, 2 received PBSCs from matched-unrelated

42 79 (P < .0001) with 2-HLA-antigen-mismatched related donors, 2.11 (P < .0001) with HLA-matched unrela

43 mochromatosis patients (2.0%) and non-health-related donors(3.1%) as was the overall prevalence of po

44 43 (P < .0001) with 1-HLA-antigen-mismatched related donors, 3.79 (P < .0001) with 2-HLA-antigen-mism

45 and 12 received HLA-identical marrow from a related donor; 3 of the recipients of haploidentical mar

46 rence was observed in HCT recipients of both related donors (79% vs 39%; P = .001) and unrelated dono

47 hemochromatosis patients than in non-health-related donors (83.5% vs 76.5%; P =.03).

48 and photophysical properties of a series of related donor-acceptor-donor oligomers incorporating the

49 te antigen-mismatched, haploidentical living-related donors after modified nonmyeloablative condition

50 ted with postdonation diabetes only in black related donors (aHR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.04-9.98; P=0.04).

51 9% of cases (34.5% immune-compromised, 14.4% related-donor), although nonirradiated components were t

52 the variation in willingness to be a living related donor, although race contributed most to the var

53 In multivariate analysis, HLA-matched related donor and prophylaxis with cyclosporine A and me

54 Forty-two patients had related donors and 34 had unrelated donors.

55 78 had human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched related donors and 39 had HLA-matched unrelated donors.

56 ng centers, 90% said they accept emotionally related donors and 60% said they actually encourage this

57 d from human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched related donors and cryopreserved.

58 ents of first kidney transplants (six living related donors and eight cadavers).

59 practice patterns of evaluation and care of related donors and recipients are not well described.

60 21 HLA-matched related-donor and 35 HLA-matched unrelated-donor transpl

61 29 were ex vivo reduced size, 33 were living-related donor, and 36 were in situ split-liver allograft

62 yped 286 patients; 99 patients had a matched related donor, and 76 patients received transplantations

63 cal cord blood (UCB), haploidentical (haplo)-related donor, and mismatched unrelated donor (MMUD) are

64 red outcomes of HLA-identical sibling, other related donor, and unrelated donor transplantation for W

65 Twelve (28%) received grafts from related donors, and 31 (72%) received grafts from unrela

66 cal sibling donors, 52% (37%-65%) with other related donors, and 71% (58%-80%) with unrelated donors

67 to 50%, an increased recurrence with living-related donors, and the rarity of graft loss due to recu

68 tched adult unrelated donors, haploidentical related donors, and umbilical cord blood stem cell produ

69 s of allogeneic transplant, in which matched related donors are available.

70 for patients who do not have an HLA-matched related donor available for bone marrow transplantation.

71 (P < 0.01) for cadaveric donor versus living related donor, blacks versus whites, age >12 versus <12

72 ar to multi-institutional studies of matched related donor BMT, and this approach appears to be curat

73 ical cord blood (dUCB) or HLA-haploidentical related donor bone marrow (Haplo-marrow) transplantation

74 ewed 196 patients undergoing T-cell depleted related donor bone marrow transplantation (BMT) between

75 For the 83 patients receiving a matched related donor bone marrow transplantation (BMT), the 3-y

76 gen (HLA)-mismatched, or HLA-haploidentical, related donor bone marrow transplantation (haploBMT) has

77 n of cord blood and bone marrow from matched related donors; both had successful engraftment and corr

78 , medical management of recipients and their related donors by the same provider is common, a practic

79 Those lacking a related donor can receive either autologous or histocomp

80 ransplants from phenotypically HLA-identical related donors can be carried after Cy alone and results

81 Intestinal transplants from living-related donors can be lifesaving for selected patients w

82 Consistent with these results, emotionally related donors contribute only a small fraction of all k

83 haemopoietic stem cells from an HLA-matched related donor does not seem to improve the clinical outc

84 the process they use for living, emotionally related donors, except that the full work-up would have

85 We investigated the impact of two age-related donor factors, hypertension and calculated creat

86 The first graft from a living-related donor failed and was followed by a second succes

87 ncies who were given grafts from HLA-matched related donors following conditioning with 2 Gy total bo

88 L) in chronic phase (CP) who lack a suitable related donor for marrow transplantation include hydroxy

89 American living kidney donors and for living-related donors for African American recipients.

90 report here on two cases in which the living-related donors for children with Alagille's syndrome had

91 In treatment decisions, genetic screening of related donors for hematopoietic stem cell transplantati

92 m of family members who are potential living-related donors for patients with this condition.

93 ation, the vast majority (81%) prefer living related donors for pediatric recipients.

94 transplants from unrelated or HLA-mismatched related donors from 1982 to 1994.

95 rst report of the successful use of a living-related donor graft for an orthotopic liver transplant t

96 The use of living-related donor grafts has produced excellent results in t

97 Related donor haploidentical hematopoietic cell transpla

98 In the United States, the use of related donors has been well established in most centers

99 uced" livers, split liver grafts, and living-related donors has provided more organs for pediatric pa

100 Intestinal transplants using living-related donors have rarely been attempted, and the surgi

101 d 73 myeloablative recipients of HLA-matched related donor HCT, using the National Cancer Institute (

102 (GVHD) after reduced-intensity conditioning, related donor hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT).

103 er matched unrelated, related, or mismatched related donor hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (H

104 Transplantation of marrow from a related donor is a life-saving and life-sustaining treat

105 scents with AML in remission, when a matched related donor is available.

106 large potential contribution of emotionally related donors is ever to be realized, transplant center

107 We present a case of living, related-donor kidney transplantation during the first tr

108 A related donor liver transplant may be a justifiable appr

109 Living-related donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an accepte

110 re obtained from cadaveric (n=23) and living-related donor (LRD) (n=10) liver transplants before and

111 In contrast, for living related donor (LRD) grafts there was no significant chan

112 barked on a study of DBMC infusion in living-related donor (LRD) kidney transplant recipients.

113 comitantly transplanted recipients of living-related donor (LRD) kidneys and donor marrow infusions g

114 we make thorough attempts to locate a living related donor (LRD) or a living unrelated donor (LURD) b

115 A successful kidney transplant from a living-related donor (LRD) remains the most effective renal rep

116 fter transplantation of 13 CAD and 12 living-related donor (LRD) renal allografts were examined by us

117 CAN in recipients of cadaveric (CAD), living-related donor (LRD), and living-unrelated donor (LURD) t

118 tes and iliac crest bone marrow of 11 living-related-donor (LRD) renal transplant recipients, who had

119 6 patients receiving unrelated or mismatched related donor marrow had a 50% 3-year actuarial DFS.

120 timing remission induction/consolidation and related donor marrow transplantation or high-dose cytara

121 wenty-one patients underwent DLI for matched related donor (MD)-persistent disease or relapse, and 15

122 Transplants from related donors mismatched for one or more HLA loci requi

123 In the absence of a suitable matched related donor, most patients will be able to find an alt

124 VHD) occurs in approximately 35% of matched, related donor (MRD) allogeneic hematopoietic cell transp

125 ) from human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matched related donor (MRD) and matched unrelated donors (MUD) p

126 ll transplantation (HCT) have an HLA-matched related donor (MRD) available to them.

127 Matched related donor (MRD) hematopoietic stem cell transplantat

128 blood (UCB) transplantations than in matched related donor (MRD) transplantations.

129 old in first remission (CR1) with a matched related donor (MRD) underwent an allogeneic stem cell tr

130 ith an human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched related donor (MRD, n = 204), HLA allele-matched unrelat

131 first complete remission (CR1), from matched related donors (MRDs).

132 atched unrelated donors (n = 18) and matched related donors (n = 11).

133 Patients with indolent disease and related donors (n = 26) had 3-year estimated OS and PFS

134 hed unrelated (n = 14, 31.1%), or mismatched related donors (n = 6, 13.4%).

135 In transplantations from HLA-matched related donors (n = 82), younger patients (</= v > 14 ye

136 us leukemia (CML) relapse in 283 consecutive related-donor (n = 177) and unrelated-donor (n = 106) al

137 urgery, splenectomy for splenomegaly, living-related donor nephrectomy, and procedures considered too

138 opexy), splenectomy for splenomegaly, living-related donor nephrectomy, gastric banding for morbid ob

139 Here, we test haploidentical, related-donor NK-cell infusions in a nontransplantation

140 an 16 years, non-white ethnicity, absence of related donor, obesity, white blood cell count more than

141 d a human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-identical, related donor or a donor disparate at a single class I o

142 one marrow transplant from an HLA-identical, related donor or immunosuppressive therapy.

143 peripheral blood stem cells from HLA-matched related-donors or HLA-9/10 or HLA-10/10 matched unrelate

144 Living related donor organs had a significantly better 5-yr sur

145 transplants for severe aplastic anemia from related donors other than HLA genotypically matched sibl

146 indicated significantly lower survival using related donors other than HLA-identical siblings (P =.00

147 URD, umbilical cord blood, or haploidentical-related donors; outcomes are either comparable or relati

148 row transplants without T-cell ablation from related donors over an 18-year period.

149 past year compared with 49.1% of non-health-related donors (P<.001).

150 Five consecutive living related donor pediatric renal transplants were reviewed

151 ave a readily available partially mismatched related donor (PMRD).

152 identical or 1-antigen-mismatched relatives (related donors [RDs]).

153 CML survivors who received an HC transplant (related donors [RDs], n = 150; unrelated donors [URDs],

154 unrelated and two HLA haploidentical living-related donor recipient pairs, whereas unidirectional re

155 ssociations with the risk of chronic GVHD in related donor-recipient pairs but not in unrelated donor

156 e tested for replication in other cohorts of related donor-recipient pairs.

157 were higher in cadaveric donor versus living related donor recipients (15.7 + 2.8 vs. 8.8 + 1.3, resp

158 Whereas none of the HAT-treated living related donor recipients had a rejection episode, 6 of 1

159 increased risk of posttransplant relapse for related-donor recipients included prolonged interval bet

160 Related-donor recipients with posttransplant chronic gra

161 Twenty-two of 165 related-donor recipients with stable or advanced disease

162 or prevention of GVHD in patients undergoing related-donor reduced-intensity conditioning haemopoieti

163 ination with standard GVHD prophylaxis after related-donor reduced-intensity conditioning haemopoieti

164 or human leukocyte antigen (HLA) mismatched related donor (relative risk [RR] = 4.1), T-cell depleti

165 one haplotype matched recipients of living, related donor renal allografts selected to control for d

166 These data suggest that living-related donor renal transplantation with steroid-free ta

167 nducted in recipients of cadaveric or living-related donor renal transplants.

168 For patients with or without a related donor, respective 5-year disease-free survival w

169 ceived whole livers, and two received living-related donor right liver lobes.

170 e-marrow transplantation from haploidentical related donors sharing at least one HLA A, B, or DR alle

171 her the medical standards for nonemotionally related donors should be the same as the standards for e

172 in clinical islet transplantation and living-related donor solid organ transplantation.

173 arrow transplantation (BMT) based on matched related donor status (n = 181) or randomization to autol

174 transplantation may give similar results to related-donor stem-cell transplantation when extended ph

175 Investigations of the radical anions of related donor-substituted 1,1,4,4-tetracyanobuta-1,3-die

176 (HLA)- haplotype mismatched (haploidentical) related donors, suggesting that this procedure makes hap

177 ow from an unrelated donor or HLA-mismatched related donor, the risk of developing lymphoproliferativ

178 Fifteen related-donor transplant recipients relapsed within 5 ye

179 In a discovery set (n=307 receiving related donor transplantation), overall survival, relaps

180 In cases of related donor transplantation, HLA compatibility may be

181 atopoietic stem cell (HSC) donor, mismatched related-donor transplantation (MMRDT) or unrelated-donor

182 unger patients and recipients of HLA-matched related donor transplantations who have cytogenetic abno

183 lization of cord blood and partially matched related donor transplants have ensured a donor for essen

184 nt have greater immunogenetic disparity than related donor transplants, these transplants are associa

185 myelodysplastic syndrome, transplanted from related donors, unrelated donors (URD), or unrelated cor

186 ase according to the transplant type (living related donor vs. cadaver, P=NS).

187 16.3% at 730 days (7.2% for patients who had related donors vs 34.1% for those with unrelated donors,

188 T) on the basis of availability of a matched related donor was also evaluated.

189 marrow donors were HLA-identical siblings, 1 related donor was mismatched at the DR locus, and 1 unre

190 neic stem-cell transplantation from matched, related donors was associated with improved outcomes in

191 arrow transplantation (BMT) from HLA-matched related donors, we found no statistically significant di

192 nts over 25 000/muL, indolent histology, and related donors were associated with improved survival.

193 m cells from human leukocyte antigen-matched related donors were randomized to receive 10 microg/kg p

194 lotype-matched renal transplants from living related donors were studied to determine the association

195 xtremely low TRM and GVHD, even when matched related donors were unavailable.

196 size grafts, of which three were from living-related donors, were used.

197 d in patients with untransformed disease and related donors, whereas patients with transformed diseas

198 olonged survival after successful BMT from a related donor with homozygous normal enzyme activity.

199 egimen in conjunction with stem cells from a related donor with one fully mismatched HLA haplotype.

200 from HLA single-haplotype mismatched living related donors, with the use of a nonmyeloablative prepa

201 ergoing TCD transplantation from HLA-matched related donors without the use of ATG.