MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109532095 · doi:10.1016/j.bbmt.2006.10.026

Pharmacokinetic Disposition and Clinical Outcomes in Infants and Children Receiving Intravenous Busulfan for Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

2007· article· en· W2109532095 on OpenAlexaff
Tal Schechter, Yaron Finkelstein, John Doyle, Zulfikarali Verjee, Myla E. Moretti, Gideon Koren, L. Lee Dupuis

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationPopulation Health Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusulfanMedicinePharmacokineticsVolume of distributionHematopoietic stem cell transplantationCmaxHepatic veno-occlusive diseaseTransplantationGastroenterologySurgeryUrologyAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted a retrospective pharmacokinetic analysis of i.v. busulfan in children undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and describe its relation to transplantation outcomes. Forty-five children (median age, 3 yr) underwent HSCT at The Hospital for Sick Children from April 2003 through January 2006 and received i.v. busulfan every 6 h as part of their conditioning regimen. Initial busulfan doses were based on actual patient weight: <9 kg, 0.95 mg/kg per dose; 9-16 kg, 1.2 mg/kg per dose; 16-23 kg, 1.1 mg/kg per dose; 24-34 kg, 0.95 mg/kg per dose; >34 kg, 0.8 mg/kg per dose. Plasma busulfan concentrations were obtained after the first dose. The fourth and subsequent busulfan doses were adjusted to achieve an area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC) of 900-1500 microM.min. Development of hepatic venous occlusive disease (HVOD; modified Baltimore criteria) and engraftment (absolute neutrophil count >or=0.5 x 10(9)/L) were evaluated. Busulfan pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using 1-compartment methods. Mean busulfan pharmacokinetic parameters were maximum concentration (C(max); 4.7 +/- 0.75 microM), volume of distribution at steady state (0.68 +/- 0.17 L/kg), elimination rate constant (0.0051 +/- 0.0010 min(-1)), total body clearance (3.5 +/- 1.23 mL/[min.kg]), and AUC (1271 +/- 280 microM.min). Mean volume of distribution at steady state was larger in children <1 yr of age (0.77 +/- 0.24 vs 0.64 +/- 0.11 L/kg; P = .040) and children <4 yr of age (0.73 +/- 0.18 vs 0.60 +/- 0.11 L/kg; P = .001) than in older children. Compared with older children, mean weight-adjusted total body clearance was higher in children <4 yr of age (3.8 +/- 1.40 versus 3.0 +/- 0.76 mL/[min.kg]). HVOD was diagnosed in 8 children (18%), including 4 children <1 yr of age. Children who developed HVOD achieved a lower C(max) than did those without HVOD (4.2 +/- 0.68 versus 4.8 +/- 0.73 microM; P = .035). Other than C(max), no association was observed between busulfan disposition and development of HVOD in children for whom i.v. busulfan doses were adjusted to achieve a target AUC. The influence of factors other than busulfan disposition on transplantation outcomes, such as genetic polymorphisms, should be evaluated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations61
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of Blood and Marrow TransplantationSame topicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationFrench-language works237,207