Effect of cinacalcet availability and formulary listing on parathyroidectomy rate trends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent trends in parathyroidectomy rates are not known. Our objective was to investigate the trend in parathyroidectomy rates between 2001 and 2010, and to evaluate if the availability and reimbursement of cinacalcet modified that trend. METHODS: Using a provincial administrative database, we included all adult patients receiving chronic dialysis treatments between 2001 and 2010 (incident and prevalent) in a time series analysis. The effect of cinacalcet availability on parathyroidectomy bimonthly rates was modeled using an ARIMA intervention model using different cut-off dates: September 2004 (Health Canada cinacalcet approval), January 2005, June 2005, January 2006, June 2006 (date of cinacalcet provincial reimbursement), and January 2007. RESULTS: A total of 12 795 chronic dialysis patients (mean age 64 years, 39% female, 82% hemodialysis) were followed for a mean follow-up of 3.3 years. During follow-up, 267 parathyroidectomies were identified, translating to an average rate of 7.0 per 1000 person-years. The average parathyroidectomy rate before cinacalcet availability was 11.4 /1000 person-years, and 3.6 /1000 person-years after cinacalcet public formulary listing. Only January 2006 as an intervention date in the ARIMA model was associated with a change in parathyroidectomy rates (estimate: -5.58, p = 0.03). Other intervention dates were not associated with lower parathyroidectomy rates. CONCLUSIONS: A reduction in rates of parathyroidectomy was found after January 2006, corresponding to cinacalcet availability. However, decreased rates may be due to other factors occurring simultaneously with cinacalcet introduction and further studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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) | 0.001 | 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".