Erythropoietin treatment elevates haemoglobin concentration by increasing red cell volume and depressing plasma volume
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Erythropoietin (Epo) has been suggested to affect plasma volume, and would thereby possess a mechanism apart from erythropoiesis to increase arterial oxygen content. This, and potential underlying mechanisms, were tested in eight healthy subjects receiving 5000 IU recombinant human Epo (rHuEpo) for 15 weeks at a dose frequency aimed to increase and maintain haematocrit at approximately 50%. Red blood cell volume was increased from 2933 +/- 402 ml before rHuEpo treatment to 3210 +/- 356 (P < 0.01), 3117 +/- 554 (P < 0.05), and 3172 +/- 561 ml (P < 0.01) after 5, 11 and 13 weeks, respectively. This was accompanied by a decrease in plasma volume from 3645 +/- 538 ml before rHuEpo treatment to 3267 +/- 333 (P < 0.01), 3119 +/- 499 (P < 0.05), and 3323 +/- 521 ml (P < 0.01) after 5, 11 and 13 weeks, respectively. Concomitantly, plasma renin activity and aldosterone concentration were reduced. This maintained blood volume relatively unchanged, with a slight transient decrease at week 11, such that blood volume was 6578 +/- 839 ml before rHuEpo treatment, and 6477 +/- 573 (NS), 6236 +/- 908 (P < 0.05), and 6495 +/- 935 ml (NS), after 5, 11 and 13 weeks of treatment. We conclude that Epo treatment in healthy humans induces an elevation in haemoglobin concentration by two mechanisms: (i) an increase in red cell volume; and (ii) a decrease in plasma volume, which is probably mediated by a downregulation of the rennin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis. Since the relative contribution of plasma volume changes to the increments in arterial oxygen content was between 37.9 and 53.9% during the study period, this mechanism seems as important for increasing arterial oxygen content as the well-known erythropoietic effect of Epo.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".