两种CD19/CD22双靶点CAR-T细胞治疗策略在儿童PAX5基因变异复发/难治性B细胞急性淋巴细胞白血病中的疗效对比研究

doi:10.12372/jcp.2026.26e0038

临床儿科杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (6): 508-517.doi: 10.12372/jcp.2026.26e0038

两种CD19/CD22双靶点CAR-T细胞治疗策略在儿童PAX5基因变异复发/难治性B细胞急性淋巴细胞白血病中的疗效对比研究

李月¹^,², 谢志伟¹, 汤燕静², 李本尚¹^,²

¹ 安徽医科大学第二附属医院儿科（安徽合肥 230601）
² 上海交通大学医学院附属上海儿童医学中心血液肿瘤科（上海 201318）

收稿日期:2026-01-19 修回日期:2026-04-18 录用日期:2026-04-22 出版日期:2026-06-15 发布日期:2026-06-04
作者简介:第一联系人：作者贡献（Authors’ Contributions）
李月负责数据管理和分析及初稿撰写。谢志伟、汤燕静、李本尚负责监督、审阅及决定最终稿。
基金资助:
项目基金：国家自然科学基金项目(81670174);项目基金：国家自然科学基金项目(81900158);项目基金：国家自然科学基金项目(82402624);安徽省健康研究计划(AHWJ 2024Ab0156);安徽医科大学科研基金(2022xkj049);安徽省科技厅临床医学研究转化专项(306238342022)

A comparative study on the efficacy of two CD19/CD22 dual-targeting CAR-T strategies in children with relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia with PAX5 gene variations

LI Yue¹^,², XIE Zhiwei¹, TANG Yanjing², LI Benshang¹^,²

¹ Department of Pediatrics, Anhui Medical University Second Affiliated Hospital, Hefei 230601, Anhui, China
² Department of Hematology and Oncology, Shanghai Children's Medical Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 201318, China

Received:2026-01-19 Revised:2026-04-18 Accepted:2026-04-22 Published:2026-06-15 Online:2026-06-04

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的抗原逃逸（尤其CD19缺失）限制CD19靶向嵌合抗原受体T细胞（CAR-T）治疗儿童复发/难治性B细胞急性淋巴细胞白血病（R/R B-ALL）的疗效，PAX5基因变异可破坏CD19表达稳定性、增加复发风险。本研究旨在比较联合输注与双顺反子两种CD19/CD22双靶点CAR-T细胞治疗策略在PAX5基因变异R/R B-ALL患儿中的疗效。方法回顾性分析2019年11月5日至2023年5月31日医院收治的PAX5基因变异R/R B-ALL患儿的临床资料。所有患儿被分为联合输注组（Co组）与双顺反子组（Bi组），经淋巴清除预处理后，输注CAR-T细胞（剂量2×10⁶~10×10⁶个细胞/kg）。主要研究终点为输注后30天完全缓解（CR）/微小残留病（MRD）阴性率、总生存期（OS）、无事件生存期（EFS）及治疗相关毒性，随访截止日期为2025年3月31日。结果共纳入22例PAX5基因变异R/R B-ALL患儿，包括融合变异18例（81.8%）、缺失2例（9.1%）及错义变异2例（9.1%），6例（27.3%）患儿存在复杂核型（≥3种异常）。其中8例接受联合输注CAR-T治疗（Co组），14例接受双顺反子CAR-T治疗（Bi组）。患儿治疗时中位年龄5.57岁（范围1.31~14.85岁），其中男13例、女9例。Co组与Bi组患儿输注后30天CR率均为100%，且MRD均为阴性（MRD<0.01%）。中位随访时间26.5个月（范围5~66个月），22例患儿6个月、12个月、3年OS率分别为95.45%、90.91%、63.64%，6个月、12个月、3年EFS率分别为77.27%、54.55%、40.91%。Co组6个月、12个月、3年OS率分别为100%、87.5%、50%，Bi组为92.9%、92.9%、71.4%；Co组6个月、12个月、3年EFS率分别为75%、62.5%、37.5%，Bi组为78.6%、50%、42.9%，两组患儿OS、EFS率比较差异均无统计学意义（P_OS=0.411，P_EFS=0.826）。共4例患儿在CAR-T治疗后接受异基因造血干细胞移植（allo-HSCT），移植组的6个月、12个月及3年OS率分别为100%、100%、50.0%，未移植组为94.4%、88.9%和66.7%；移植组6个月、12个月及3年EFS分别为75.0%、75.0%、50.0% ，未移植组为77.8%、50.0%、38.9%，两组间患儿的OS、EFS率比较差异均无统计学意义（P_OS=0.693，P_EFS=0.553）。Co组和Bi组的≥3级细胞因子释放综合征发生率分别为25.0%和57.1%，免疫效应细胞相关神经毒性综合征发生率分别为25.0%和21.4%，均安全可控且未发生治疗相关死亡。结论 CD19/CD22双靶点CAR-T的联合输注与双顺反子策略，对PAX5基因异常R/R B-ALL患儿均具有良好的短期疗效及安全性，但3年EFS率仍处于较低水平，提示长期预后仍有待进一步改善。

关键词: CD19/CD22双靶点嵌合抗原受体T细胞, 复发/难治性B细胞急性淋巴细胞白血病, PAX5基因变异, 异基因造血干细胞移植

Abstract:

Objective Antigen escape, particularly CD19 loss, limits the efficacy of CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy in children with relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R B-ALL). PAX5 gene variations have been shown to disrupt CD19 expression stability and increase relapse risk. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic efficacy of two CD19/CD22 dual-targeting CAR-T strategies, namely co-infusion versus bicistronic construct, in children with R/R B-ALL harboring PAX5 gene variations. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of R/R B-ALL children with PAX5 gene variation admitted to the hospital from November 5, 2019 to May 31, 2023. The patients were divided into a co-infusion group (Co group) and a bicistronic group (Bi group). All children received lymphodepletion conditioning followed by CAR-T cell infusion at a dose ranging from 2×10⁶ to 10×10⁶ cells/kg. The primary endpoints included the 30-day complete remission (CR) rate, minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity rate, relapse rate, survival outcomes, and treatment-related toxicity. The follow-up cutoff date was March 31, 2025. Results A total of 22 children with R/R B-ALL and PAX5 gene variations were included, including 18 cases (81.8%) of fusion variations, 2 cases (9.1%) of deletions, and 2 cases (9.1%) of missense variations. Six children (27.3%) had complex karyotypes (≥ 3 abnormalities). Among them, 8 patients received combined infusion of CAR-T treatment (Co group), and 14 received bicistronic CAR-T treatment (Bi group). The median age of the children at the time of treatment was 5.57 years (ranging from 1.31 to 14.85 years), and there were 13 boys and 9 girls. The CR rate of children in both the Co group and the Bi group was 100% 30 days after infusion, and the MRD was negative in both groups (MRD<0.01%). The median follow-up time was 26.5 months (range 5 to 66 months). Among the 22 patients, the 6-month, 12-month and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates were 95.45%, 90.91% and 63.64%, respectively. Meanwhile, the 6-month, 12-month and 3-year event-free survival (EFS) rates were 77.27%, 54.55% and 40.91%, respectively. The 6-month, 12-month, and 3-year OS rates in the Co group were 100%, 87.5%, and 50%, respectively, while those in the Bi group were 92.9%, 92.9%, and 71.4%, respectively. The 6-month, 12-month, and 3-year EFS rates in the Co group were 75%, 62.5%, and 37.5%, respectively, and those in the Bi group were 78.6%, 50%, and 42.9%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in OS and EFS rates between the two groups (P_OS=0.411, P_EFS=0.826). A total of 4 children received allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) after CAR-T treatment. The 6-month, 12-month and 3-year OS rates in the transplantation group were 100%, 100% and 50.0%, respectively, while those in the non-transplantation group were 94.4%, 88.9% and 66.7%, respectively. The 6-month, 12-month and 3-year EFS rates in the transplantation group were 75.0%, 75.0% and 50.0%, respectively, while those in the non-transplantation group were 77.8%, 50.0% and 38.9%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in OS and EFS rates between the two groups (P_OS=0.693, P_EFS=0.553). Regarding toxicity, the incidence of grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was 25.0% and 57.1% in the Co and Bi groups, respectively; the incidence of immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) was 25.0% and 21.4%, respectively. All adverse events were manageable and no treatment-related death occurred. Conclusions Both co-infusion and bicistronic CD19/CD22 dual-targeting CAR-T strategies exhibit favorable short-term efficacy and comparable safety profiles in pediatric R/R B-ALL with PAX5 variations. However, the 3-year EFS rate remains at a relatively low level, suggesting that the long-term prognosis still needs further improvement.

Key words: CD19/CD22 dual-targeting chimeric antigen receptor T-cell, relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia, PAX5 variation, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

中图分类号:

李月, 谢志伟, 汤燕静, 李本尚. 两种CD19/CD22双靶点CAR-T细胞治疗策略在儿童PAX5基因变异复发/难治性B细胞急性淋巴细胞白血病中的疗效对比研究[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2026, 44(6): 508-517.

LI Yue, XIE Zhiwei, TANG Yanjing, LI Benshang. A comparative study on the efficacy of two CD19/CD22 dual-targeting CAR-T strategies in children with relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia with PAX5 gene variations[J]. Journal of Clinical Pediatrics, 2026, 44(6): 508-517.

图/表 5

表1

患儿临床特征与CAR-T治疗情况"

组别	患儿	性别	年龄	基因变异	入组指征	CAR-T治疗前使用 blinatumomab	CAR-T治疗前 allo-HSCT	复发部位
Co组	例1	女	5.1	PAX5-C20orf112	一次复发	否	否	骨髓、睾丸
	例2	男	3.8	PAX5-C20orf112	一次复发	否	否	骨髓、CNS
	例3	女	14.9	PAX5 DEL CDKN2A	三次复发	－	－	骨髓、睾丸
	例4	女	7.0	PAX5-TCRA; TCRA-PAX5	一次复发	否	否	骨髓
	例5	男	6.8	PAX5-AUTS2	难治	否	否	骨髓
	例6	女	2.4	PAX5-ZNF521	一次复发	否	否	骨髓
	例7	女	11.3	MIR4475-PAX5	难治	否	否	骨髓
	例8	女	5.6	PAX5-NOL4L	一次复发	否	否	骨髓
Bi组	例9	女	1.3	ZCCHC7-PAX5	一次复发	否	否	骨髓
	例10	男	5.5	PAX5 DEL	三次复发	否	是	骨髓
	例11	女	4.4	PAX5-ZCCHC7;PAX5-NOL4L	一次复发	否	否	骨髓、CNS
	例12	女	5.1	PAX5-AUTS2;	一次复发	否	否	骨髓、CNS
	例13	男	4.7	PAX5-ZNF521	一次复发	否	否	骨髓
	例14	男	5.7	PAX5-CD99	一次复发	否	否	骨髓
	例15	男	11.1	PAX5-GLIPR2	二次复发	否	否	骨髓、CNS
	例16	女	3.6	PAX5-ZNF521	一次复发	否	否	骨髓
	例17	女	8.5	PAX5:S247fs	一次复发	否	否	骨髓、睾丸
	例18	女	6.5	PAX5-HNRNPDL	一次复发	否	否	骨髓、睾丸
	例19	男	4.1	PAX5-FAM208A	一次复发	否	否	骨髓、睾丸
	例20	男	12.1	PAX5:G338_E9splice	二次复发	否	否	骨髓
	例21	男	6.0	PAX5-FBRSL1	一次复发	否	否	骨髓
	例22	女	2.2	PAX5:R31W	二次复发	否	否	CNS
组别	患儿	性别	CAR-T输注前MRD/%		总CAR-T输注剂量/×10⁶·kg^-1	19CAR⁺/%	22CAR⁺/%	第30天疾病状态
Co 组	例1	女	34.5		8.7	49.0	34.0	MRD 阴性
	例2	男	8.0		6.0	48.3	44.2	MRD 阴性
	例3	女	0.1		4.9	30.0	38.0	MRD 阴性
	例4	女	22.9		3.2	67.2	62.9	MRD 阴性
	例5	男	0.8		5.9	58.7	58.4	MRD 阴性
	例6	女	66.5		1.8	30.0	20.0	MRD 阴性
	例7	女	1.4		5.1	42.8	40.2	MRD 阴性
	例8	女	17.6		2.2	68.1	75.0	MRD 阴性
Bi 组	例9	女	10.0		5.2	27.3	20.3	MRD 阴性
	例10	男	5.0		6.3	35.2	46.6	MRD 阴性
	例11	女	9.4		4.0	50.3	62.2	MRD 阴性
	例12	女	－		8.0	37.8	49.8	MRD 阴性
	例13	男	8.1		4.5	40.8	51.9	MRD 阴性
	例14	男	20.0		10.0	43.7	43.7	MRD 阴性
	例15	男	0.2		2.9	46.7	50.1	MRD 阴性
	例16	女	12.6		5.1	62.0	75.0	MRD 阴性
	例17	女	35.5		3.4	40.4	61.9	MRD 阴性
	例18	女	1.9		2.4	34.0	44.0	MRD 阴性
	例19	男	<0.01		2.3	38.0	47.0	MRD 阴性
	例20	男	0.8		6.9	29.7	42.4	MRD 阴性
	例21	男	53.6		8.1	57.0	69.0	MRD 阴性
	例22	女	－		5.7	31.0	36.0	MRD 阴性

表1

图1

表2

图2

图3

参考文献 30

[1]	王毓, 薛玉娟, 左英熹, 等. CD19 CAR-T细胞治疗难治/复发急性B淋巴细胞白血病儿童及青少年患者的疗效及安全性[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2024, 42(7): 583-588.
	Wang Y, Xue YJ, Zuo YX, et al. Efficacy and safety of CD19 targeted CAR-T cells in the treatment of refractory/relapsed B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children and adolescents[J]. Linchuang Erke Zazhi, 2024, 42(7): 583-588.
[2]	杨柳, 苏萌, 张婧, 等. CD19/CD22 CAR-T细胞治疗MLL基因重排阳性难治/复发儿童急性B系淋巴细胞白血病临床分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2024, 42(10): 888-894.
	Yang L, Su M, Zhang J, et al. Clinical analysis of CD19/CD22 CAR-T cell therapy for MLL gene rearrangement-positive refractory/relapsed childhood acute B-lineage lymphoblastic leukemia[J]. Linchuang Erke Zazhi, 2024, 42(10): 888-894.
[3]	Lamble AJ, Myers RM, Taraseviciute A, et al. Preinfusion factors impacting relapse immunophenotype following CD19 CAR T cells[J]. Blood Adv, 2023, 7(4): 575-585.
[4]	Majzner RG, Mackall CL. Tumor antigen escape from CAR T-cell therapy[J]. Cancer Discov, 2018, 8(10): 1219-1226.
[5]	Lamble AJ, Kovach AE, Shah NN. How I treat post-immunotherapy relapsed B-ALL[J]. Blood, 2025, 145(1): 64-74.
[6]	Chung EY, psathas JN, Yu D, et al. CD19 is a major B cell receptor-independent activator of MYC-driven B-lymphomagenesis[J]. J Clin Invest, 2012, 122(6): 2257-2266.
[7]	Robson EJ, He SJ, Eccles MR. A PANorama of PAX genes in cancer and development[J]. Nat Rev Cancer, 2006, 6(1): 52-62.
[8]	Decker T, Pasca di Magliano M, McManus S, et al. Stepwise activation of enhancer and promoter regions of the B cell commitment gene Pax5 in early lymphopoiesis[J]. Immunity, 2009, 30(4): 508-520.
[9]	Liu GJ, Cimmino L, Jude JG, et al. Pax5 loss imposes a reversible differentiation block in B-progenitor acute lymphoblastic leukemia[J]. Genes Dev, 2014, 28(12): 1337-1350.
[10]	Kuiper RP, Schoenmakers EF, van Reijmersdal SV, et al. High-resolution genomic profiling of childhood ALL reveals novel recurrent genetic lesions affecting pathways involved in lymphocyte differentiation and cell cycle progression[J]. Leukemia, 2007, 21(6): 1258-1266.
[11]	Mullighan CG, Goorha S, Radtke I, et al. Genome-wide analysis of genetic alterations in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia[J]. Nature, 2007, 446(7137): 758-764.
[12]	Jia Z, Gu Z. PAX5 alterations in B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia[J]. Front Oncol, 2022, 12: 1023606.
[13]	Fry TJ, Shah NN, Orentas RJ, et al. CD22-CAR T cells induce remissions in CD19-CAR naïve and resistant B-ALL[J]. Nat Med, 2018, 24(1): 20-28.
[14]	Hirabayashi K, Du H, Xu Y, et al. Dual targeting CAR-T cells with optimal costimulation and metabolic fitness enhance antitumor activity and prevent escape in solid tumors[J]. Nat Cancer, 2021, 2(9): 904-918.
[15]	Myers RM, DiNofia AM, Li Y, et al. CD22-targeted chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells for children and adults with relapse of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia after CD19-directed immunotherapy[J]. J Immunother Cancer, 2025, 13(4): e011549.
[16]	Shah NN, Highfill SL, Shalabi H, et al. CD4/CD8 T-cell selection affects chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell potency and toxicity: updated results from a phase I anti-CD22 CAR T-cell trial[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2020, 38(17): 1938-1950.
[17]	Frank MJ, Baird JH, Kramer AM, et al. CD22-directed CAR T-cell therapy for large B-cell lymphomas progressing after CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy: a dose-finding phase 1 study[J]. Lancet, 2024, 404(10450): 353-363.
[18]	Cronk RJ, Zurko J, Shah NN. Bispecific chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy for B cell malignancies and multiple myeloma[J]. Cancers, 2020, 12(9): 2523.
[19]	Xie B, Li Z, Zhou J, et al. Current status and perspectives of dual-targeting chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for the treatment of hematological malignancies[J]. Cancers (Basel), 2022, 14(13): 3230.
[20]	Spiegel JY, patel S, Muffly L, et al. CAR T cells with dual targeting of CD19 and CD22 in adult patients with recurrent or refractory B cell malignancies: a phase 1 trial[J]. Nat Med, 2021, 27(8): 1419-1431.
[21]	Shalabi H, Qin H, Su A, et al. CD19/22 CAR T cells in children and young adults with B-ALL: phase 1 results and development of a novel bicistronic CAR[J]. Blood, 2022, 140(5): 451-463.
[22]	Wei G, Zhang Y, Zhao H, et al. CD19/CD22 dual-targeted CAR T-cell therapy for relapsed/refractory aggressive B-cell lymphoma: a safety and efficacy study[J]. Cancer Immunol Res, 2021, 9(9): 1061-1070.
[23]	Li Y, Moriyama T, Yoshimura S, et al. PAX5 epigenetically orchestrates CD58 transcription and modulates blinatumomab response in acute lymphoblastic leukemia[J]. Sci Adv, 2022, 8(50): eadd6403.
[24]	Orlando EJ, Han X, Tribouley C, et al. Genetic mechanisms of target antigen loss in CAR19 therapy of acute lymphoblastic leukemia[J]. Nat Med, 2018, 24(10): 1504-1506.
[25]	Nix MA, Mandal K, Geng H, et al. Surface proteomics reveals CD72 as a target for in vitro-evolved nanobody-based CAR-T cells in KMT2A/MLL1-rearranged B-ALL[J]. Cancer Discov, 2021, 11(8): 2032-2049.
[26]	Zhang WY, Wang Y, Guo YL, et al. Treatment of CD20-directed Chimeric Antigen Receptor-modified T cells in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma: an early phase IIa trial report[J]. Signal Transduct Target Ther, 2016, 1: 16002.
[27]	Giordano Attianese GM, Marin V, Hoyos V, et al. In vitro and in vivo model of a novel immunotherapy approach for chronic lymphocytic leukemia by anti-CD23 chimeric antigen receptor[J]. Blood, 2011, 117(18): 4736-4745.
[28]	Chu F, Cao J, Liu J, et al. Chimeric antigen receptor T cells to target CD79b in B-cell lymphomas[J]. J Immunother Cancer, 2023, 11(11): e007515.
[29]	Köksal H, Dillard P, Josefsson SE, et al. Preclinical development of CD37CAR T-cell therapy for treatment of B-cell lymphoma[J]. Blood Adv, 2019, 3(8): 1230-1243.
[30]	Qin H, Dong Z, Wang X, et al. CAR T cells targeting BAFF-R can overcome CD19 antigen loss in B cell malignancies[J]. Sci Transl Med, 2019, 11(511): eaaw9414.

两种CD19/CD22双靶点CAR-T细胞治疗策略在儿童PAX5基因变异复发/难治性B细胞急性淋巴细胞白血病中的疗效对比研究

A comparative study on the efficacy of two CD19/CD22 dual-targeting CAR-T strategies in children with relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia with PAX5 gene variations

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 30

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

组别	患儿	CRS等级	CRS持续时间/d	ICANS等级	ICANS 持续时间/d	接受托珠单抗	皮质类固醇使用	B细胞再生障碍直至末次随访/d	最后状态
Co组	例1	2	－	0	－	是	否	100	存活
	例2	4	6	4	1	是	是	126	存活
	例3	0	－	0	－	否	否	150	死亡
	例4	2	4	0	－	是	否	303	死亡
	例5	1	4	0	－	是	否	190	存活
	例6	1	8	0	－	是	否	191	死亡
	例7	3	3	2	2	是	是	110	死亡
	例8	1	2	0	－	否	否	183	存活
Bi组	例9	3	9	0	－	是	否	－	存活
	例10	2	4	0	－	是	否	1 098	存活
	例11	3	8	3	13	是	是	93	死亡
	例12	3	6	0	－	否	否	67	存活
	例13	2	5	0	－	是	否	－	死亡
	例14	2	2	0	－	否	否	－	存活
	例15	1	9	1	7	是	否	27	死亡
	例16	4	8	0	－	是	是	721	存活
	例17	3	6	3	2	是	是	61	存活
	例18	1	4	0	－	否	否	31	死亡
	例19	0	－	0	－	否	否	176	存活
	例20	3	4	0	－	是	否	32	存活
	例21	3	7	0	－	否	否	148	存活
	例22	3	9	0	－	是	否	371	存活

[1]	吴进军, 熊昊, 曾辉, 陈智, 杨李, 孙鸣, 王卓, 杜宇, 祁闪闪, 王伟, 张兰男. 异基因造血干细胞移植联合化疗治疗儿童髓系肉瘤7例临床分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2026, 44(1): 44-50.
[2]	王真, 朱嘉莳, 付盼, 王丹, 张娜, 邵静波, 李红. 复发急性淋巴细胞白血病患儿的预后及影响因素单中心分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2025, 43(4): 271-277.
[3]	吴正宙, 詹丽萍, 徐宏贵, 李欣瑜, 王茵, 阙丽萍, 方建培, 黄科. 异基因造血干细胞移植治疗儿童高危急性T淋巴细胞白血病23例临床研究[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2025, 43(12): 947-959.
[4]	胡佳悦, 应令雯, 常国营, 李娟, 杨帆, 王翠锦, 郁婷婷, 姚如恩, 罗成娟, 王秀敏. 8例儿童异染性脑白质营养不良临床表型、遗传学分析及异基因造血干细胞移植疗效观察[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2025, 43(10): 734-741.
[5]	罗明静, 余嘉明, 王晓东, 张小玲, 余阅, 张瑜, 文飞球, 刘四喜. 424例地中海贫血患儿异基因造血干细胞移植后继发侵袭性真菌病临床分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2025, 43(1): 21-28.
[6]	颜莓, 唐维兵, 方拥军, 黄婕, 朱亭, 付金玉, 夏晓娜, 刘长伟, 万园园, 潘键. 异基因造血干细胞移植患儿移植后饮食变化影响因素分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2024, 42(11): 955-961.
[7]	陈燕飞, 钟雪梅, 马昕, 廖伟伟, 刘嵘, 邹继珍. 儿童异基因造血干细胞移植相关性肠道血栓性微血管病变临床特征分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2023, 41(3): 192-196.
[8]	方拥军, 魏宇婷, 薛瑶. 异基因造血干细胞移植在溶酶体贮积症治疗中的应用[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2023, 41(3): 181-186.
[9]	徐佳伟, 金润铭. 儿童再生障碍性贫血造血干细胞移植相关并发症[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2023, 41(3): 175-180.
[10]	谢莹莹, 陈霞, 杨文钰, 刘芳, 赵贝贝, 张小燕, 任媛媛, 张然然, 竺晓凡, 郭晔. 儿童异基因造血干细胞移植后中枢神经系统淋巴增殖性疾病1例报告并文献复习[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2022, 40(2): 129-133.
[11]	聂应明，刘婧，戚畅，等. 儿童异基因造血干细胞移植后急性肾损伤临床分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2022, 40(1): 21-.
[12]	何云燕. 造血干细胞移植后出血性膀胱炎的诊疗[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2022, 40(1): 8-.
[13]	朱成琳，陈广华，翟　宗，等. 儿童异基因造血干细胞移植术后巨细胞病毒感染临床分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2020, 38(9): 641-.
[14]	肖玉华，李春富，何岳林，等. 异基因造血干细胞移植治疗儿童急性髓系白血病临床研究[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2019, 37(5): 321-.
[15]	李静, 赖永榕. 地中海贫血患儿异基因造血干细胞移植术后结核分支杆菌感染1 例报告[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2017, 35(1): 50-.