Utilization of recombinant activated factor VII in southern Ontario in 85 patients with and without haemophilia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) is licensed for the treatment of bleeding in individuals with haemophilia and inhibitors. The use of rFVIIa appears to be increasing, and an increase in unlicensed use is suspected. There are currently few data about the specific indications for its use. The aim of this study was to describe the patterns of utilization of rFVIIa. We performed a retrospective cohort study using rFVIIa infusion data collected prospectively and clinical data collected retrospectively. Patients were identified using a tracking system designed to account for use of all coagulation factor concentrates issued in southern Ontario. Between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2005, 85 patients received rFVIIa. 1164 infusions were given (8246.4 mg). Haemophilia patients with inhibitors accounted for 82.9% of rFVIIa infused and represented 8.2% of patients. The total amount of rFVIIa used increased each year from 2001 to 2004 and then decreased in 2005. The total number of infusions of rFVIIa administered annually increased. Both on-label and off-label use of rFVIIa increased. The number of patients with haemophilia receiving rFVIIa remained small and constant. The number of patients receiving rFVIIa for off-label indications increased markedly. Most rFVIIa infusions were given for licensed indications; however, these infusions represented <10% of patients treated. Overall, the utilization of rFVIIa is increasing, mostly for approved indications; however, the number of patients being prescribed rFVIIa for off-label indications has increased. The tracking system used in this study is a valuable tool to describe ongoing utilization patterns of rFVIIa.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".