MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990236086 · doi:10.1111/bjh.13408

A phase‐II sequential case‐series study of all patients presenting to four plasma exchange centres with presumed relapsed/refractory thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura treated with rituximab

2015· article· en· W1990236086 on OpenAlexaffabout
William F. Clark, David Barth, Donald M. Arnold, Kathryn E. Webert, Paul R. Yenson, John G. Kelton, Lihua Li, Steven R. Foley

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Haematology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicComplement system in diseases
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaVancouver General HospitalWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRituximabRefractory (planetary science)Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpuraThrombotic microangiopathyADAMTS13Internal medicineSurgeryGastroenterologyPlateletLymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary objective of this phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy of rituximab in the management of adult patients with physician-diagnosed presumed thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP); relapsed or refractory. We conducted a multicentre study in four Canadian hospital-based apheresis units. Forty patients with presumed TTP (20 refractory and 20 relapsing) were sequentially enrolled and all received rituximab in a standardized manner. A complete response was documented in 14 of 19 refractory patients by week 8 and 15/16 were alive and in remission at 52 weeks (one patient was lost to follow-up, one was a non-responder, and three died). Among relapsing patients, 16/18 had a complete response at week 8 and 18/18 at week 52 (one patient lost to follow-up and one withdrew). At 1 year, all relapsing and 85% of refractory patients survived. Of 38/40 patients who had ADMATS13 testing at study entry, 13/19 refractory and 10/19 relapsing patients had ADAMTS13 < 10% (typical TTP); whereas 6/19 refractory and 9/19 relapsing cases had ADAMTS13 > 10% (other thrombotic microangiopathy; TMA). Refractory-typical TTP in contrast to refractory-other TMA and all relapsing patients treated with plasma exchange and rituximab, were less likely to be responsive and more likely to die or relapse.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations34
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of HaematologySame topicComplement system in diseasesFrench-language works237,207