MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reduction of cyclosporine following the introduction of everolimus in maintenance heart transplant recipients: a pilot study

2009· article· en· W2023234932 on OpenAlexaff
Heather J. Ross, Peter W. Pflugfelder, Haissam Haddad, Marcelo Cantarovich, Michael White, Andrew Ignaszewski, Jonathan G. Howlett, Marc Vaillancourt, Richard Dorent, Jeffrey R. Burton

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplant International · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaMontreal Heart InstituteUniversity of OttawaWestern UniversityMcGill University Health CentreToronto General Hospital
FundersNovartis PharmaNovartis
KeywordsEverolimusMedicineRenal functionUrologyCalcineurinHeart transplantationInternal medicineNephrologyEzetimibeAzathioprineTransplantationGastroenterologyCholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data are scarce concerning the calcineurin inhibitor dose reduction required following introduction of everolimus in maintenance heart transplant recipients to maintain stable renal function. In a 48-week, multicenter, single-arm pilot study in heart transplant patients >12 months post-transplant, everolimus was started at 1.5 mg/day (subsequently adjusted to target C(0) 5-10 ng/ml). Mycophenolate mofetil or azathioprine was discontinued on the same day and cyclosporine (CsA) dose was reduced by 25%, with a further 25% reduction each time calculated glomerular filtration rate (cGFR) decreased to <75% of baseline. Of 36 patients enrolled, 25 were receiving everolimus at week 48. From baseline to week 48, there was a mean decrease of 44.5%, 50.9% and 44.6% in CsA dose, C(0) and C(2), respectively. Mean cGFR was 68.9 +/- 14.5 ml/min at baseline and 61.6 +/- 11.5 ml/min at week 48 (P = 0.018). The prespecified criterion for stable renal function was met, i.e. a mean decrease

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)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations25
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplant InternationalSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207