Canadian multi‐institutional survey of immune tolerance therapy (ITT) – experience with the use of recombinant factor VIII for ITT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Immune tolerance therapy (ITT) is currently the most effective approach to eradicate inhibitors in patients with haemophilia A. Limited evidence suggests that the use of plasma-derived factor VIII (pdFVIII) for ITT may be associated with a greater success rate than recombinant factor VIII (rFVIII). Analysis of ITT cases in Canada offered the opportunity to examine the success rate of using rFVIII for ITT, as rFVIII has been used almost exclusively for Canadian haemophilia A patients since 1994. The results of 32 patients from five haemophilia treatment centres were collated. Three patients continue on ITT. Of the 29 patients who completed ITT, 25 (86.2%) used rFVIII exclusively, and four used pdFVIII exclusively or pdFVIII followed by rFVIII. The initial FVIII dosing frequency was once per day in 72.4% of patients at an average dose of 98 U kg(-1) (range 50-200). Eight patients (25%) received one or more adjuvant therapies. The median duration of ITT was 1.1 years (mean 1.5 years, range 9 days to 6 years). The overall success rate of the 29 patients who completed ITT was 79.3% (23/29), which is comparable with the results of immune tolerance registries. Our results suggest that the success rate of ITT using rFVIII is not inferior to the results with pdFVIII.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".