A Randomized Controlled Trial of Filgrastim for the Treatment of Hospitalized Patients with Multilobar Pneumonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assessed the safety and efficacy of filgrastim (r-metHuG-CSF [recombinant human methionine granulocyte colony-stimulating factor]), when combined with intravenous (IV) antibiotics, in the treatment of hospitalized adult patients with multilobar community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Four hundred eighty patients were randomized to receive placebo (n=243) or filgrastim 300 microg/day (n=237), in addition to standard therapy. Treatment with study drug was continued for 10 days, until the peak white blood cell (WBC) count reached 75x109/L, until discharge from the hospital, until death, or until IV antibiotics were discontinued. Study-related observations continued through day 29. Filgrastim increased WBC counts (baseline median, 13.3x109/L; median peak, 43. 8x109/L). The 2 treatment groups were not statistically different with respect to the study end points; however, there was a trend toward reduction of mortality in patients with pneumococcal bacteremia. Although further studies will be required to validate this observation, filgrastim was safe and well tolerated when administered to patients with multilobar CAP.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".