MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2002027689 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0068820

The Impact of Prolonged Storage of Red Blood Cells on Cancer Survival

2013· article· en· W2002027689 on OpenAlexaffabout
Natasha Kekre, Ranjeeta Mallick, David Allan, Alan Tinmouth, Jason Tay

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerMedicineBlood preservationInternal medicinePhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The duration of storage of transfused red blood cells (RBC) has been associated with poor clinical outcomes in some studies. We sought to establish whether prolonged storage of transfused RBC in cancer patients influences overall survival (OS) or cancer recurrence. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Patients diagnosed with cancer at The Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre between January 01, 2000 and December 31, 2005 were included (n = 27,591) where 1,929 (7.0%) received RBC transfusions within one year from diagnosis. Transfused RBC units were categorized as "new" if stored for less than 14 days, "intermediate" if stored between 14 and 28 days and "old" if stored for more than 28 days. Baseline characteristics between the comparative groups were compared by ANOVA test. Categorical variables and continuous variables were compared using Chi-squared and Wilcoxan rank-sum tests respectively. Overall survival was not associated with duration of storage of transfused RBC with a median survival of 1.2, 1.7, 1.1 years for only new, intermediate and old RBC units respectively (p = 0.36). Cancer recurrence was significantly higher in patients who received a RBC transfusion than those who did not (56.3% vs 33.0% respectively; p<0.0001) but was not affected by the duration of storage of transfused RBC (p = 0.06). In multivariate analysis, lung cancer, advanced stage, chemotherapy, radiation, cancer-related surgery and cancer recurrence were associated with inferior OS (p<0.05), while age, advanced stage, lung cancer, and more than 6 units of blood transfused were associated with cancer recurrence (p<0.05). The duration of storage of RBC before transfusion was not associated with OS or cancer recurrence in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: In patients diagnosed with cancer, the duration of storage of transfused RBC had no impact on OS or cancer recurrence. This suggests that our current RBC storage policy of providing RBC of variable duration of storage for patients with malignancy is safe.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicBlood transfusion and management→French-language works237,207→