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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".