Determinants of C‐reactive protein in chronic hemodialysis patients: Relevance of dialysis catheter utilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biomarkers of inflammation, especially C-reactive protein (CRP), have been consistently shown to predict poor outcomes in chronic hemodialysis (CHD) patients. However, the determinants of CRP and the value of its monitoring in CHD patients have not been well defined. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate possible determinants of the inflammatory response in CHD patients with a focus on dialysis catheter utilization. Monthly CRP were measured in 128 prevalent CHD patients (mean age 56.6 years [range 19-90], 68% African Americans, 39% diabetics [DM]) over a mean follow-up of 12 months (range 2-26 months). There were a total of 2405 CRP measurements (median 5.7 mg/L; interquartile range [IQR] 2.4-16.6 mg/L). The presence of a dialysis catheter (p<0.002), cardiovascular disease (p=0.01), male gender (p=0.005), higher white blood cell count (p<0.0001), elevated phosphorus (p=0.03), and lower cholesterol (p=0.02) and albumin (p<0.0001) concentrations were independent predictors of elevated CRP in the multivariate analysis. Additionally, CRP levels were significantly associated with the presence of a catheter, when comparing the levels before and after catheter insertion (p=0.002) as well as before and after catheter removal (p=0.009). Our results indicate that the presence of a hemodialysis catheter is an independent determinant of an exaggerated inflammatory response in CHD patients representing a potentially modifiable risk factor.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".