Treatment of canine idiopathic immune‐mediated haemolytic anaemia with mycophenolate mofetil and glucocorticoids: 30 cases (2007 to 2011)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare short-term outcome and frequency of adverse events for dogs with idiopathic immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia treated with glucocorticoids and mycophenolate mofetil vs alternate immunosuppressive protocols. METHODS: A retrospective study of medical case records of dogs with immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia was conducted. Data collected included signalment, clinicopathological data, medications administered, duration of hospitalization, short-term survival and adverse events. Variables were compared between dogs treated with glucocorticoids and mycophenolate mofetil (mycophenolate mofetil group) vs dogs treated with other two-drug immunosuppressive protocols (combined group). RESULTS: Sixty-four cases of idiopathic immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia were identified. Two dogs were euthanased without treatment, three received glucocorticoids alone, and seven received two additional drugs. Fifty-two dogs received glucocorticoids and additional immunosuppressive medications: 30 mycophenolate mofetil, 15 cyclosporine, 6 azathioprine and 1 human immunoglobulin. There was no significant difference between the discharge rate, 30-day or 60-day survival rates between the mycophenolate mofetil and the combined groups (Fisher's exact; P=0·272, 0·518, 1·000, respectively). The sole adverse event observed in the mycophenolate mofetil group was diarrhoea (n=5). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Administration of mycophenolate mofetil appears safe in dogs with idiopathic immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia. The combination of glucocorticoids and mycophenolate mofetil has similar efficacy to alternate immunosuppressive protocols used to treat this disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".