Treatment of Thyroxine Malabsorption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the case study was to report the successful use of intramuscular levothyroxine (L-T 4 ) in two patients with profound oral L-T 4 malabsorption. We present two cases of patients who remained hypothyroid despite very high oral doses of L-T 4 . In both cases, poor L-T 4 absorption was documented with an absorption study. Intramuscular L-T 4 injections were initiated in both cases and doses were titrated to achieve normalization of thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) and free thyroxine (free T 4 ). Additionally, after achieving euthyroidism for a period of time, each patient was able to successfully transit back to oral administration of L-T 4 . Synthetic oral L-T 4 is the drug of choice for replacement therapy in patients with hypothyroidism. Whenever euthyroidism cannot be achieved despite escalating L-T 4 doses, the presence of interfering factors must be considered. These factors include low patient compliance or reduced L-T 4 absorption due to other dietary factors, concomitant medication use or gastrointestinal disease. Furthermore, severe hypothyroidism itself may impair absorption, presumably due to edema of the small bowel mucosa. Parenteral L-T 4 has been shown to be an effective method of replacing thyroid hormone in those patients with apparent thyroid hormone malabsorption. However, there is no consensus or guidelines available to aid physicians in the use of parenteral L-T 4 . In patients with hypothyroidism despite large doses of levothyroxine, physicians should consider thyroid malabsorption once compliance and interfering medicines have been ruled out. In these patients, if no correctable interfering factor is identified, intramuscular replacement appears to be an effective alternative. J Endocrinol Metab. 2015;5(1-2):192-195 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jem277w
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".