Genetic determinants of cocaine-associated agranulocytosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Drug-induced agranulocytosis is a recognized adverse drug event associated with serious infectious complications. Levamisole is an antihelminthic and immunomodulator withdrawn from North American markets in 2005 after reports of agranulocytosis. Previous studies of levamisole, suggest that the human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B27 confers a genetic predisposition to this adverse drug event. Since 2009, emergency room visits due to agranulocytosis in individuals consuming levamisole-adulterated crack-cocaine have increased. METHODS: We performed a case-control study using a genotyping assay and novel gene chip to test the association between cocaine-associated agranulocytosis (CAA) and HLA-B27 and to identify pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic gene variants associated with the phenotype. RESULTS: Fifty-one CAA cases were identified through a provincial physician reporting system between 2008 and 2011. We examined eight of these cases and 26 matched controls. Genotyping revealed a significant association between HLA-B27 and CAA (odds ratio [OR] 9.2, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.54-54.6). We also observed a similar association with the HLA-B27 tag single nucleotide polymorphism rs4349859 (OR 9.2, 95% CI 1.5-54.6) and rs13202464 (OR 6.7, 95% CI 1.1-41). Further associations were identified with variants in the ARBCC12 (OR 10.0, 95% CI 2.7-36.8) and CYP11A1 (OR 7.4, 95% CI 2.1-26.6) genes, while a novel protective association was observed with variants in the ARDB1 gene (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.007-0.46). CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed the association of HLA-B27 with CAA and identified additional susceptibility variants. Health care providers should inform people who are identified as having CAA that it is genetically determined and can recur with continued cocaine use. The severity of infections and subsequent hospitalization, and the risk of recurrence may prompt health-promoting behaviour changes of the affected individuals. These genetic associations warrant the attention of public health and knowledge translation efforts to highlight the implications for susceptibility to this severe adverse drug event.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".