Primary and Secondary Thrombotic Microangiopathy Referred to a Single Plasma Exchange Center for Suspected Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura: 2000-2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients who present with unexplained thrombocytopenia, that is, hemolytic anemia with end-organ dysfunction with a normal coagulation profile are suspected to have thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) and are usually referred to a plasma exchange (PE) center for immediate treatment to prevent mortality. Here, we describe the distribution and outcomes of patients with suspected TTP referred to a single center for PE therapy. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we reviewed the data of all consecutive patients who were treated with PE for suspected TTP at our center between January 2000 and December 2011 (Canada). Patients were followed for a median of 73 months. RESULTS: Of 137 patients, 70 (51%) were determined to have primary (idiopathic) TTP and 67 (49%) secondary TTP or hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). Patients with primary TTP were twice as likely to be refractory than those with secondary TTP or HUS: 27 vs. 12%; p = 0.03. Patients with primary TTP were more likely to experience remission (61/70 (87%) vs. 45/67 (67%); p = 0.01); however, the relapse rate was higher in patients with primary versus secondary TTP-HUS: 11 vs. 1.5%, respectively (p = 0.03). The overall mortality rate was 23% (13 vs. 33% in those with primary vs. secondary TTP-HUS; p = 0.007). After excluding deaths from scleroderma renal crisis (100% mortality), malignancy (75% mortality) and stem cell transplant (50% mortality), the survival rate for secondary TTP was 85%. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to patients with secondary TTP or HUS, those with primary TTP have a higher refractory and relapse rate, but are also more likely to achieve remission and survive.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".