MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066381032 · doi:10.1080/13693780400019990

Long-term antifungal prophylaxis in high-risk hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients

2005· review· en· W2066381032 on OpenAlexaff
Eric J. Bow

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Mycology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAspergillosisVoriconazolePosaconazoleImmunosuppressionMicafunginMedicineAzoleEchinocandinItraconazoleHematopoietic stem cell transplantationInternal medicineTransplantationImmunologyFluconazoleAntifungalDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The risks for invasive fungal infections, particularly mould infections such as invasive aspergillosis, among hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients are linked to the duration and severity of myelosuppression and immunosuppression. Strategies to prevent invasive fungal infections have focused primarily on the use of orally administered azole antifungal agents during the neutropenic period rather than on the more prolonged post-engraftment period. The major limitations of these studies included the heterogeneity among the subjects studied for fungal infection risk factors, the agents administered, the dosing, and duration of prophylaxis. More recent studies have attempted to examine the efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis strategies among allogeneic HSCT recipients to day 100 and beyond. It is clear that a variety of products have efficacy in preventing invasive candidiasis, including imidazole and triazole antifungals, low-dose amphotericin B, and the echinocandin, micafungin; however, only the extended spectrum azole, itraconazole, has been shown to impact the incidence of proven invasive aspergillosis. Other extended spectrum azole antifungal agents, voriconazole and posaconazole, are being studied as long-term prophylaxis in high-risk HSCT recipients. While clinical trials have suggested that a duration of prophylaxis against moulds of six months or more may be required, it remains unclear if this is required in all cases. The prophylactic efficacy over time may be linked to the degree of immunosuppression as measured by markers such as the numbers of circulating CD4 T lymphocytes. Concerns about selection for resistant moulds among long-term recipients of these drugs are emerging. The cumulative experience to date suggests that long-term antifungal chemoprophylaxis is feasible and effective when applied in defined circumstances. The concerns about treatment-related toxicities, resistance, and costs are valid.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical MycologySame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207