MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

[Influence of Anticoagulants on Detection of ITP Platelet-Specific Autoantibodies and Relationship of Autoantibody Types with Glucocorticoid Efficacy].

2015· article· en· W1916813290 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Chen, Jian Ge, Min Ruan, Linyang Zhu, Qingshu Zeng, Ruixiang Xia, Heyu Ni

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeparinPlateletAutoantibodyHeparin-induced thrombocytopeniaGlucocorticoidMedicineInternal medicineAnticoagulantGastroenterologyPlatelet activationAntibodyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of divalent cation chelator EDTA and heparin sodium on the detection of ITP platelet-specific autoantibodies by the modified monoclonal antibody immobilization of platelet antigen assay (MAIPA) and to explore the relationship between types of platelet specific autoantibodies and glucocorticoid efficacy. METHODS: The samples were obtained from EDTA- and heparin- anticoagulant ITP patients, respectively, so as to detect the platelet-specific autoantibodies (GPIIb/IIIa and GPIbα) in 140 ITP samples by modified MAIPA, then the differences between these two methods were compared. RESULTS: Out of 140 cases in EDTA group, 55 cases were positive for GPIIb/IIIa, while 76 cases in heparin group were positive for GPIIb/IIIa, 42 cases in both group were repeatable; among them 13 cases were positive in EDTA group and negative in heparin group, while 34 cases were positive in heparin group and negative in EDTA group, there was significant difference between them (x (2) = 9.38, P < 0.05), 62 cases in 140 cases of EDTA group were positive for GPIba, while 51 cases in heparin group were positive for GPIba, 42 cases in both group were repeatabe; among them 20 cases were positive in EDTA group and negative in heparin group, while 9 cases were positive in heparin group and negative in EDTA group, there was no significant difference between them (x (2) = 3.44, P > 0.05). A total of 320 cases received a standard glucocorticoid treatment, out of them 143 cases were positive for GPIbα with effective rate 39.9%, 177 cases were negative for GPIbα with effective rate 79.7%, there was statisticalty significant difference between them (x (2) = 53.115, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: EDTA anticoagulant (a divalent cation chelator) has a significant influence on detection of ITP platelet-specific autoantibodies (GPIIb/IIIa) by a modified MAIPA method and the GPIbα antibody positive may be one of the important factors that results in un-sensitivity of ITP patients to glucocorticoid treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments→French-language works237,207→