Intradialytic clearance of opioids: Methadone versus hydromorphone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Opioids are commonly prescribed to patients with chronic pain associated with end-stage renal disease requiring hemodialysis. The stability of opioid analgesia during dialysis may vary among different opioids. No studies to date have corroborated this clinical observation by directly comparing plasma concentrations of different opioids during dialysis. We compared changes in peridialysis plasma concentrations of 2 pharmacokinetically distinct opioids, methadone and hydromorphone (HM). Fourteen dialysis patients with chronic pain received either methadone or HM for at least 2 weeks before beginning the study. Blood samples were obtained immediately before, during, and after hemodialysis in 2 separate dialysis sessions, 1 week apart, and were analyzed for opioid concentrations. Methadone plasma concentrations were more stable during hemodialysis compared to HM: the mean percent change of methadone plasma levels was 14.9% ± 8.2% (± SD) compared with 55.1% ± 8.1% in the HM treatment group, a difference of 40.2% (95% confidence interval 17.14 to 63.14). The mean plasma clearance of methadone was 19.9 ± 8.5 mL/min (± SD) compared with 105.7 ± 8.3 mL/min for HM, a difference of 85.7 mL/min (95% confidence interval 61.9 to 109.1). There were no differences between the 2 opioid groups in pain scores, side effect profile, and quality of life. Methadone therapy was not associated with an increased rate of adverse events. If confirmed by larger clinical studies, methadone could be considered as one of the opioids of choice in dialysis patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".