Combination immunosuppressant therapy for patients with chronic refractory immune thrombocytopenic purpura
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment options for patients with chronic refractory immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) are limited. Because combination immunosuppressant therapy appeared to be effective in ITP and other disorders, we used this approach in patients with particularly severe and refractory ITP. In this retrospective, observational study, we determined the response (platelet count above 30 x 10(9)/L and doubling of baseline) among 19 refractory ITP patients. Treatment consisted of azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and cyclosporine. The patients had failed a median of 6 prior treatments, including splenectomy (in all except 1). Of 19 patients, 14 (73.7%) achieved a response lasting a median of 24 months, after which time 8 (57.1%) relapsed. Of the 8 relapsing patients, 6 responded to additional treatments. Of the 14 patients who achieved an initial response, 2 (14.3%) remained in remission after eventually stopping all medications. Severe adverse events did not occur. Combination immunosuppressant therapy can produce a rise in the platelet count that is sometimes sustained in refractory ITP patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".