Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Interpreting outcome data in hematopoietic cell transplantation for leukemia: tackling common biases
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Interpreting outcome data in hematopoietic cell transplantation for leukemia: tackling common biases
Do you wish to request the book?
Interpreting outcome data in hematopoietic cell transplantation for leukemia: tackling common biases
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Interpreting outcome data in hematopoietic cell transplantation for leukemia: tackling common biases
2015
Overview
Although patient outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) have significantly improved in recent years, complications and associated mortality remain substantial. Although many transplants are performed worldwide, the number of patients enrolled prospectively into clinical trials is small. Patient and physician preferences often override treatment assignments in randomized transplant trials, biasing the common intention-to-treat analyses. Large retrospective and observational database studies are likely to detect the real effect of allo-HCT. However, they may be subject to immortal time and other biases derived from heterogeneity of allo-HCT indications and approaches and differences in referral or institutional policies affecting patient selection. Timing of the transplant procedure may be fundamental but studies commencing at start of transplant may neglect the influence of pretransplant therapies. Conversely, a prolonged lag period between the decision and execution of transplant may artificially ‘improve’ the outcome by ‘natural’ selection weeding out patients relapsing or dying before transplant. Finally, comparative nonrandomized transplantation trials often suffer from unbalanced assignment for therapy arms. We herein present common clinical dilemmas discussing proper application of available evidence in daily clinical practice. Pitfalls and caveats frequent in clinical studies of allo-SCT are highlighted to promote a balanced interpretation of available data.
Publisher
Nature Publishing Group UK,Nature Publishing Group
