Screening for Hepatitis B Surface Antigen before Chemotherapy: Current Practice and Opportunities for Improvement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Hepatitis B virus (hbv) reactivation is a recognized complication of chemotherapy. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend that all patients be screened for the hbv surface antigen (hbsag) before chemotherapy. We sought to determine the frequency of hbsag testing before chemotherapy at our hospital and to increase the frequency of testing to more than 90% of patients starting chemotherapy. METHODS: Using a retrospective electronic chart review, we identified the frequency of hbsag testing for patients initiated on intravenous chemotherapy at out institution between March 2006 and March 2007. The frequency of left ventricular function testing in the subgroup of patients receiving potentially cardiotoxic chemotherapy was identified as a comparator. An educational intervention was developed and delivered to the multidisciplinary oncology team. The frequency of hbsag testing was determined post intervention. Qualitative interviews were conducted with the members of the oncology team to identify risk perception and barriers to testing. RESULTS: Of 208 patients started on intravenous chemotherapy between March 2006 and March 2007, only 28 (14%) were tested for hbsag. All 138 patients scheduled for cardiotoxic chemotherapy (100%) underwent left ventricular function testing. In the post-intervention phase, of 74 patients started on intravenous chemotherapy, 24 (31%) underwent hbsag testing, with 1 patient testing positive. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of testing for hbsag before chemotherapy was very low at our institution. An educational intervention resulted in only a modest improvement. Potential barriers to routine screening include lack of awareness about existing guidelines, controversy about the evidence that supports hbsag testing guidelines, and a perception by physicians that hbv reactivation does not occur with solid tumours.
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) | 0.000 | 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".