Oral Sodium Thiosulfate as Maintenance Therapy for Calcific Uremic Arteriolopathy: A Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Calcific uremic arteriolopathy (CUA) is a rare but serious disorder affecting 4% of dialysis patients. Intravenous sodium thiosulfate (IV STS) has been shown as an effective treatment. In Canada, the average cost of IV STS is about CAD 12,000 per month, while the cost of compounded oral STS is CAD 45 per month. METHODS: Prospective cohort where all patients diagnosed with CUA during the year 2011 were included. They were treated initially with IV STS. Afterwards, each patient had a baseline bone scan and was started on oral STS for a total of 6 months followed by a repeat bone scan. A single radiologist, blinded to the dates of both scans for a given patient, read all scans. RESULTS: Four patients were studied. The intravenous dose used was 25 g three times a week for an average duration of 131 days. After the maintenance therapy, 2 patients developed further regression of the lesions, 1 had stable lesions, and 1 got worse; however, nonadherence to the drug was confirmed. The oral medication was well tolerated with no reported side effects. CONCLUSION: Oral STS, after IV STS, seems to stabilize, or even improve CUA lesions, and therefore could be useful as maintenance therapy, especially since its cost is much more reasonable than IV STS and due to the ongoing shortage of the IV formulation.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".