Cornillon Jérôme, Detrait Marie, Karam Micheline, Le Bars Laëtitia, Meziane Youcef, Pereira Maguy, Richard-Leveille Sandrine, Marion Stephanie, Leroux Severine, Coiteux Valérie, Raus Nicole, Seris Stéphanie, Guyotat Denis, Yakoub-Agha Ibrahim, Laurent Nathalie
Institut de cancérologie Lucien-Neuwirth, département d'hématologie clinique, 108, bis avenue A.-Raimond, 42271 Saint-Priest en Jarez, France.
CHRU de Nancy, service d'hématologie et de transplantation médullaire, rue du Morvan, 54500 Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy, France.
Bull Cancer. 2019 Jan;106(1S):S71-S82. doi: 10.1016/j.bulcan.2018.10.003. Epub 2018 Nov 15.
The quality of the information provided in post-transplant follow-up is necessary to obtain a coherent and exploitable database. Since the beginning of 2017, three forms (Med-B-allograft) have been available: the first month (Day 0), Day 100 (second report) and an annual follow-up report. Recommendations for follow-up were addressed in the 2014 harmonization workshop, "Harmonization of Data Coding…". However, it is sometimes difficult to determine which data to specify in ProMISe for post-transplantation. The objective of this workshop was to clarify certain situations and/or items.