Minimal acute rejection in pediatric lung transplantation - Does it matter?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Benden C, Faro A, Worley S, Arrigain S, Aurora P, Ballmann M, Boyer D, Conrad C, Eichler I, Elidemir O, Goldfarb S, Mallory GB, Mogayzel PJ, Parakininkas D, Solomon M, Visner G, Sweet SC, Danziger-Isakov LA. Minimal acute rejection in pediatric lung transplantation – Does it matter?.Pediatr Transplantation 2010: 14:534–539. © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: In adult lung transplantation, a single minimal AR episode is a significant predictor of BOS independent of other factors. However, the significance of single minimal AR episodes in children is unknown. A retrospective, multi-center analysis was performed to determine whether isolated single AR episodes are associated with an increased BOS risk in children. Risk factors for BOS, death, or re-transplantation, and a combined outcome of BOS, death, or re-transplantation were assessed. Original data included 577 patients (<21 yr of age). A total of 383 subjects were eligible for the study. Fifteen percent of patients developed BOS, and 13% of patients either died or underwent re-transplant within one-yr post-transplant. In the multivariable survival model for time to BOS, there was no significant risk to developing BOS after a single minimal AR (A1) episode (HR 1.7, 95% CI 0.64–4.8; p = 0.28). Even after a second minimal AR episode, no significant risk for BOS was appreciated. However, a single episode of mild AR (A2) was associated with twice the risk of BOS within one-yr post-transplant. In this select cohort, a single minimal AR episode was not associated with an increased risk for BOS within one yr following lung transplantation, in contrast to previous reports in adults.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".