Iron absorption and oxidant stress during erythropoietin therapy in very low birth weight premature infants: a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Iron supplementation may be associated with oxidative stress particularly in premature infants. Our purpose was to examine 1) early supplemental iron during treatment with erythropoietin (EPO) and oxidative stress; 2) enhanced iron absorption during EPO in those infants receiving human milk. Therefore, we determined the effect of erythropoietin plus supplemental iron intakes (4 mg/kg/d) on antioxidant status and iron incorporation. METHODS: Ten very-low-birth-weight infants who were enterally fed and receiving either human milk or formula were followed for 4 weeks during erythropoietin therapy; blood and urine were collected at 3 times; baseline, 2 and 4 weeks later. Once oral feeds commenced the study protocol was initiated. After baseline blood collection, a dose of Fe57 was administered. Two weeks later, a dose of Fe58 was administered as ferrous chloride to determine the effect of human-milk or formula on iron incorporation into RBCs. RESULTS: Infants started the study at 35 +/- 13 days. Incorporation of isotope into RBCs did not differ between formula fed for Fe57 (mean incorporation 8 +/- 2.9 n = 3) compared to human-milk fed infants (8.7 +/- 5 n = 7) nor for Fe58 (6 +/- 2.7 n = 3 vs. 8.6 +/- 5 n = 7). Tissue damage measured by malondialdehyde in plasma and F-2--isoprostanes in urine, did not differ by feed or over time. Neither ability to resist oxidative stress/nor RBC superoxide dismutase differed according to feed or over time. CONCLUSION: Data suggest that during erythropoietin therapy antioxidant defence in VLBW infants are capable of dealing with early supplemental iron during treatment with EPO.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".