MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017537908 · doi:10.1159/000183038

Anemia of Chronic Renal Failure: Inhibition of Erythropoiesis by Uremic Serum

2008· article· en· W2017537908 on OpenAlexaff
Melvin H. Freedman, Daniel C. Cattrarn, Fred Saunders

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journals · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythropoietin and Anemia Treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUremiaErythropoietinMedicineErythropoiesisInternal medicineAnemiaHemodialysisEndocrinologyPeritoneal dialysisPathogenesisProgenitor cellKidney diseaseDialysisImmunologyStem cellBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pathogenesis of anemia in patients with end-stage renal disease was studied by assessing the effect of uremic serum on the proliferation and maturation of erythroid progenitor cells, BFU-E and CFU-E, into colonies in vitro. Nucleated peripheral blood cells from 10 anemic patients produced normal or increased numbers of BFU-E colonies in response to added erythropoietin when cultured in control serum, but declined a mean of 63% when autologous uremic serum was substituted. Uremic sera from 90 patients cultured with normal human marrow produced a mean decrease in BFU-E colony growth of 72%, and of CFU-E colony growth of 82%, compared to control serum. Neither hemodialysis nor peritoneal dialysis was effective in removing the inhibitor. We conclude that patients with uremia have adequate circulating erythroid progenitors that respond to erythropoietin normally when removed from the uremic environment, and that uremic serum is toxic and inhibitory to erythropoiesis. This may be an important mechanism in the anemia of chronic renal failure.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations33
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œNephron journals/Nephron journalsSame topicErythropoietin and Anemia TreatmentFrench-language works237,207