Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor therapy for patients with neutropenia and/or neutrophil dysfunction secondary to glycogen storage disease type 1b
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) therapy in patients with neutropenia and/or neutrophil dysfunction secondary to glycogen storage disease (GSD) type 1b. Thirteen patients with neutropenia and/or neutrophil dysfunction secondary to GSD type 1b were treated with rhG-CSF. The effects of therapy on neutrophil numbers and in vitro neutrophil function and on bone marrow cellularity and morphology were studied. The clinical status of the patients and the occurrence of adverse events associated with rhG-CSF use were monitored. Use of rhG-CSF therapy was associated with a significant increase in circulating neutrophil numbers (P <. 01) and an improvement in neutrophil function as assessed in vitro. In addition, rhG-CSF therapy produced a significant increase in marrow cellularity and an increase in myeloid:erythroid (M:E) ratio, indicating stimulation of granulopoeisis. No adverse effects on marrow function were noted; in particular, no myelodysplasia or marrow exhaustion was seen. Use of rhG-CSF therapy was associated with objective and subjective improvements in infection-related morbidity. The therapy was well tolerated, although all patients developed splenomegaly, and 5 patients developed mild hypersplenism that did not require any specific treatment. rhG-CSF therapy is efficacious in the management of neutropenia and neutrophil dysfunction associated with GSD type 1b. Patients on this therapy need to be monitored for hypersplenism. Continued follow-up will be necessary to confirm long-term safety; however, no significant short-term toxicity was noted.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".