4.5 Article

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation activity worldwide in 2012 and a SWOT analysis of the Worldwide Network for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Group including the global survey

Journal

BONE MARROW TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 51, Issue 6, Pages 778-785

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bmt.2016.18

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. EBMT
  2. University of Basel
  3. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0611-10275] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Data on 68 146 hematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCTs) (53% autologous and 47% allogeneic) gathered by 1566 teams from 77 countries and reported through their regional transplant organizations were analyzed by main indication, donor type and stem cell source for the year 2012. With transplant rates ranging from 0.1 to 1001 per 10 million inhabitants, more HSCTs were registered from unrelated 16 433 donors than related 15 493 donors. Grafts were collected from peripheral blood (66%), bone marrow (24%; mainly non-malignant disorders) and cord blood (10%). Compared with 2006, an increase of 46% total (57% allogeneic and 38% autologous) was observed. Growth was due to an increase in reporting teams (18%) and median transplant activity/team (from 38 to 48 HSCTs/team). An increase of 167% was noted in mismatched/haploidentical family HSCT. A Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) analysis revealed the global perspective of WBMT to be its major strength and identified potential to be the key professional body for patients and authorities. The limited data collection remains its major weakness and threat. In conclusion, global HSCT grows over the years without plateauing (allogeneic>autologous) and at different rates in the four World Health Organization regions. Major increases were observed in allogeneic, haploidentical HSCT and, to a lesser extent, in cord blood transplantation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available