MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4405054908 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-204241

Ability of Coagulation Tests to Assess Hemotherapeutic Agent Response Testing

2024· article· en· W4405054908 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sheldon Goldstein, William M. Briggs, Michael A. Cirullo, Michael Kagan, Morayma Reyes Gil

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineCoagulation testingCoagulationInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Hemotherapeutic agents (HA) administered in response to abnormal coagulation tests may not be optimal, for abnormal tests do not identify specific deficient coagulation factors. The Multiple Coagulation Test System (MCTS) (Coagulation Sciences, Riverdale, NY) is developed to perform Hemotherapeutic Agent Response Testing (HART) to compare ability of HA (blood products, factors and drugs) to normalize clotting. In MCTS, after HA added to blood, a steel ball moves through blood as a cartridge moves in a see-saw motion. As blood clots, changes in motion of the steel ball result in changes in voltage applied to a magnetic field. These changes indicate clot formation. The goal of the study is to compare coagulation tests and assess probabilities (PROB) of the tests to generate dose-response (DR) curves for high-dose HA vs. low-dose HA vs. coagulopathic samples, in four hemostatic states in five coagulopathic models. Methods: With IRB approval and informed consent 40 volunteers donated fresh whole blood (FWB) (Step A). Contrived whole blood samples of severe hemophilia, Von Willebrand Disease, dilution, hypofibrinogenemia and F:VII deficiency were created. FWB was centrifuged at 3000 g X 15 minutes. Platelet-deficient plasma (PDP) was pipetted avoiding the buffy coat. Factor-deficient diluents were added to RBC and buffy coat in volume equal to PDP removed, to create severely coagulopathic blood (Step B). Diluents that replaced PDP to create coagulopathies were: factor-VIII deficient plasma, George King Biomedical, Overland Park, KS (GKB) for hemophilia; type III VWD plasma, GKB, for VWD; 5% albumin, Grifols, Los Angeles, CA for dilution; fibrinogen-depleted plasma, Affinity Biologicals, Ancaster, ON, Canada for hypofibrinogenemia; F:VII-deficient plasma, GKB, for F:VII deficiency. HA were added to step B blood to treat coagulopathies in doses of 20% and 100% of factors, resulting in step B samples treated with low-dose HA (step C) and high-dose HA (step D). HA agents were Humate-P, CSL Behring (CSL), King of Prussia, PA for hemophilia and VWD; HemosIL normal assayed plasma, Instrumentation Laboratory, Bedford, MA for dilution; RiaSTAP, CSL for hypofibrinogenemia; reagent grade F:VIIa, Enzyme Research Laboratories, South Bend, IN for F:VII deficiency. At A, B, C and D tests performed included activated clotting time (ACT), thromboelastogram (TEG), ProTime (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), MCTS Clotting Time (MCTS-CT), and factor levels appropriate for each coagulopathy. A random-intercept hierarchal mixed regression model assessed differences in tests at B, C, and D vs A. The model was recast into Bayesian form. Default priors and 4 chains of 50,000 iterations each were used to reach convergence. Predictive posterior distributions, by averaging over assumed new samples, were calculated for scenarios, e.g., probability ACT in high-dose HA would clot faster than low-dose HA. A DR curve was modeled, calculating PROB a high-dose HA would clot faster than low-dose and, simultaneously, that low-dose HA would clot faster than coagulopathic. The higher the PROB, the greater chance a DR exists. These are ordinary PROBS; not p-values or parameter estimates. i.e. chance that in new samples, high-dose HA would clot faster than low-dose. Sample size calculations based on paired differences of coagulopathic to normal MCTS-CT, with power of 90% and a test level of 0.05, assuming difference 200 seconds lower than the baseline 400 seconds, with a standard deviation of 100 seconds, indicated a sample size of n = 10. Results: Due to cost once a vial of HA was opened we performed as many experiments that day as possible, explaining n = 11 or 12 for some experiments. Factor levels confirmed coagulopathies were created and treated. Tests with 1st and 2nd highest PROB of demonstrating DR curve for hemophilia APTT (PROB 0.931) and MCTS (PROB 0.78); VWD, APTT (PROB 0.995) and MCTS (PROB 0.934); for hemodilution, APTT (PROB 0.997) and ACT (PROB 0.989); for hypofibrinogenemia, TEG-MA (PROB 0.996) and TEG-G (PROB 0.916); for F:VII deficiency, APTT (PROB 0.758) and MCTS (PROB 0.746). Conclusion: Different tests had greater PROB for different coagulopathic models. As other tests, MCTS differentiated between hemostatic states. Optimizing doses of HA may improve MCTS performance. If MCTS can perform automated HART, treatment truly targeted to each patient's unique coagulopathy may become a reality.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,861
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,713

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,006
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,201
Tête enseignante GPT0,443
Écart entre enseignants0,242 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlTravaux en français237 207