MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125598437 · doi:10.1634/theoncologist.10-1-63

Prior Red Blood Cell Transfusions in Cancer Patients Increase the Risk of Subsequent Transfusions With or Without Recombinant Human Erythropoietin Management

2005· review· en· W2125598437 on OpenAlexaff
Félix Couture, A. Robert Turner, Barbara Melosky, L. Xiu, Richard K. Plante, Catherine Y. Lau, Ian Quirt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Oncologist · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythropoietin and Anemia Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreBC Cancer AgencyAlberta Cancer FoundationHôtel-Dieu de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpoetin alfaErythropoietinRelative riskPlaceboBlood transfusionConfidence intervalInternal medicineAnemiaCancerSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer patients often receive transfusions when their hemoglobin concentration falls to dangerously low levels due to chemotherapy or due to the disease itself. The availability of recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO) has significantly reduced transfusion frequencies in cancer patients. However, the predictability of transfusions prior to the use of rHuEPO for future transfusions has not been evaluated. Data from five randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy and epoetin alfa were utilized to calculate the relative risk of subsequent transfusions in patients who were pretransfused. A meta-analysis with patient-level data was used to assess predictors of transfusion. Baseline data from an open-label study were used to compare quality-of-life (QOL) parameters between previously transfused and transfusion-naive patients. The mean relative risks (RR) of exposure to additional transfusion for pretransfused patients on placebo or epoetin alfa were 2.14 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.73, 2.65) and 2.51 (95% CI: 1.92, 3.27), respectively, compared with nontransfused patients. Data from the meta-analysis of patients on epoetin alfa showed that pretransfusion was the most significant predictor for subsequent transfusions (parameter estimate = -1.2628, p < 0.0001 from Logistic Regression Analysis). While epoetin alfa was similarly effective in reducing transfusion risks for patients with or without pretransfusions (compared with placebo), those who were pretransfused were more than twice as likely to be subsequently transfused, compared with those not pretransfused. QOL was significantly worse for pretransfused patients than for nontransfused patients, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -Anemia and the Linear Analogue Scale Assessment QOL instruments. The results suggest that transfusions prior to epoetin alfa therapy increase the risk of future transfusions, and early treatment with epoetin alfa might reduce the risk of subsequent transfusions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations25
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe OncologistSame topicErythropoietin and Anemia TreatmentFrench-language works237,207