A linked donor-recipient study to evaluate parvovirus B19 transmission by blood component transfusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parvovirus B19V infection can be a serious infection for hematology patients with underlying hemolysis or compromised erythropoiesis syndromes. Although case reports of B19V transmission by blood component transfusion (as contrasted to manufactured plasma derivatives) are rare, no studies have systematically determined a rate of transmission to recipients transfused with B19V DNA-positive components. We used a linked donor and recipient repository and a sensitive, quantitative B19V DNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay to assess such transmission in B19V-susceptible (ie, anti-B19V immunoglobulin G [IgG] negative) recipients. We assessed 112 B19V DNA-positive components from 105 donors (of 12 529 tested donations) transfused into a population of surgical patients with a pretransfusion B19V IgG seroprevalence of 78%. We found no transmission to 24 susceptible recipients from transfusion of components with B19V DNA at concentrations less than 10(6) IU/mL (upper 95% confidence interval, 11.7%). We found an anamnestic IgG response in one pretransfusion seropositive recipient transfused with a component containing greater than 10(10) IU/mL B19V DNA. These findings show either that transmission from components with less than 10(6) IU/mL does not occur, or, if it does, it is an uncommon event. These data do not support the need to routinely screen blood donations with a sensitive B19V DNA nucleic acid assay.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".