Treatment of growth failure with growth hormone in children with chronic kidney disease: an open-label long-term study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To assess long-term efficacy and safety of recombinant human growth hormone (GH) in children with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: An open-label, international, multicenter study. Children with CKD and growth failure received GH (0.35 mg/kg/week). The primary efficacy endpoint was a significant change in height velocity (HV) and height standard deviation score (SDS) versus baseline after 12 months of treatment, extended to 24 months, then to 5 years. RESULTS: In total, 81 patients enrolled (CKD Stage 4 - 5 = 37, on dialysis = 27, post-transplant = 17). After 12 and 24 months of treatment, increases were seen in mean (SD) HV (4.6 (3.1) to 9.0 (3.6) cm/year and 4.5 (3.3) to 7.5 (2.9) cm/year, respectively; both p < 0.001), mean (SD) height SDS (-3.7 (1.7) to -3.0 (1.7) and -3.6 (1.5) to -2.5 (1.5), respectively; both p < 0.001) and mean (SD) HV SDS (-2.4 (2.5) to 3.8 (4.5) and -2.4 (2.2) to 1.1 (3.8), respectively; both p < 0.001). A normal height SDS was seen in 1% of children at baseline, 17% after 12 months and 43% after 24 months of treatment. Improvements were similar across CKD subgroups with the greatest improvements in CKD Stage 4 - 5. Among 31 patients who completed about 5 years of treatment, four reached final height. There was no undue bone age acceleration and no deterioration of kidney function. Ten adverse events were related to GH treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In this long-term study, GH treatment was associated with significant improvements in growth and height in children with CKD and growth failure, and was well tolerated.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".