Variability in tacrolimus blood levels increases the risk of late rejection and graft loss after solid organ transplantation in older children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pollock-BarZiv SM, Finkelstein Y, Manlhiot C, Dipchand AI, Hebert D, Ng VL, Solomon M, McCrindle BW, Grant D. Variability in tacrolimus blood levels increases the risk of late rejection and graft loss after solid organ transplantation in older children.Pediatr Transplantation 2010: 14:968–975. © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: Late graft rejection impairs the long-term function of organ transplants in children. Previous studies suggest patients with wide variation in tacrolimus levels may have higher rates of late kidney and liver graft rejection. The reproducibility of this finding and impact on graft and recipient survival have not been reported. We investigated factors associated with late rejection >6 months post-transplant in 144 heart, kidney, liver, and lung transplant recipients (ages 8–18, ≥1-yr survivors, receiving tacrolimus-based immunosuppression), comparing late rejectors (n = 61, 42%) to non-rejectors (no rejection >6 months); groups had similar mean tacrolimus concentrations ≤6 months post-transplant. For all organ types, increased standard deviation in intrapatient tacrolimus blood levels was an independent risk factor for late rejection (OR 1.6 [CI 1.1–2.1]; p = 0.02). Each 1-point increase in s.d. > 2 of tacrolimus level >6 months post-transplant associated with 1.58 increase in hazard of graft loss (p = 0.003). Graft survival (conditional on one-yr survival) was significantly better for those with s.d. < 2 at >6 months post-transplant: 98% at three and five yr, versus 88%, 70%, at three and five yr, in patients with s.d. > 2 (p = 0.003). In conclusion, high s.d. in serial tacrolimus concentrations associated with increased risk of late rejection and graft loss in pediatric organ transplant recipients, providing opportunities for screening and interventions.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".