Clinical Consequences of Intermittent Elevation of C‐Reactive Protein Level in Hemodialysis Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of persistently high C‐reactive protein (CRP) levels is well known to be associated with a state of inflammation, malnutrition, and erythropoietin resistance in hemodialysis (HD) population. Meanwhile, a substantial group of patients present with intermittent elevations of CRP levels, and its clinical consequences are unclear. We designed this study to compare the inflammatory and nutritional parameters and erythropoietin requirements in HD patients with persistent or intermittent CRP elevation and those with CRP levels in without. We included 100 HD patients [age: 48.4 ± 14.3 years; HD duration: 69.3 ± 49.0 months (minimum 12 months)]. The 6‐month retrospective clinical and laboratory data were retrieved from the patient records, and those with chronic inflammatory disease, malignancy, infectious complications, and surgery were excluded. The monthly determined CRP levels (at least 6 for each patient) were reviewed, and the patients were grouped according to their CRP levels as those with persistent (group 1), intermittent (at least one level of CRP 10 mg/L) (group 2), and those with CRP in normal ranges set by the laboratory (group 3). We compared the fibrinogen, ICAM‐1, VCAM‐1, albumin, prealbumin, normalized protein catabolic rate (nPCR), interdialytic weight gain (IDWG), and rHuEPO/kg/Hct results of the patient groups. The patient groups revealed significant differences in terms of fibrinogen (p < 0.001), albumin (p < 0.0001), prealbumin (p < 0.007), ICAM‐1 (p < 00.2) levels and nPCR (p < 0.03), IDWG (p < 0.02), and rHuEPO/kg/Hct (p < 0.03) values. Group 2 presented to be in risk of inflammation and malnutrition with a decrease in albumin levels and nPCR and presence of rHUEpo resistance when compared to patients in group 3. We conclude that, similar to HD patients with persistently high CRP levels, those with intermittent elevation of CRP must also be considered to be in a state of chronic inflammatory response associated with malnutrition and erythropoietin resistance. This signifies the importance of regulatory monitoring of CRP in HD population.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".