MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Amphotericin B Nephrotoxicity in Children

2004· review· en· W1976895119 on OpenAlexaff
Ran D. Goldman, Gideon Koren

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNephrotoxicityMedicineAmphotericin B deoxycholateAmphotericin BRenal functionPharmacologyUrologyToxicityGlycosuriaInternal medicineGastroenterologyEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitusCaspofungin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amphotericin B is the treatment of choice for severe systemic fungal infections. Nephrotoxicity is the most clinically significant adverse effect, but studies examining nephrotoxicity in children are scarce. Nephrotoxicity includes decreased glomerular filtration rate and distal tubulopathy with urinary loss of potassium and magnesium, renal tubular acidosis, loss of urine concentrating ability, and sometimes Fanconi's syndrome. The mechanisms involved in nephrotoxicity include the use of deoxycholate, the vehicle for amphotericin, reduction in renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate, increased salt concentrations at the macula densa, interaction of amphotericin with ergosterol in the cell membrane, and apoptosis in proximal tubular cells and medullary interstitial cells. Some risk factors for amphotericin nephrotoxicity have been determined over the years. Cumulative dosage, treatment duration, and dosing schedule as well as the combination of amphotericin with other nephrotoxic drugs, such as diuretics and cyclosporine, are important risk factors. Mechanisms to prevent nephrotoxicity include the use of lipid formulations such as amphotericin B lipid complex, amphotericin B colloidal dispersion, and liposomal amphotericin B and the concurrent use of volume repletion. Amiloride can be considered in serious potassium loss.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.348 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations89
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Hematology/OncologySame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207