A descriptive analysis of international transfusion practice and bleeding outcomes in patients with acute leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently, bleeding has been used in platelet (PLT) trials rather than surrogate outcomes. The purpose of this study was to provide a descriptive summary of data from PLT studies conducted in four countries and exploratory analyses to determine the relationship between bleeding and PLT count. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A descriptive analysis was performed on original data from the Italian trigger study, the US TRAP study, the Canadian febrile reaction study, and a clinical chart review from one hospital site in the United Kingdom. The relationship between bleeding and PLT count was explored with the Italian data. RESULTS: A total of 897 patients with acute leukemia received 10,506 PLT transfusions. Grade 3 or Grade 4 WHO bleeding frequency was 28.1 percent (252/897) but varied by country: Italy, 10.8 percent (27/250); United States, 36.4 percent (217/598); Canada, 18.9 percent (7/37); and the United Kingdom, 8.3 percent (1/12). Grade 1 or Grade 2 bleeding was reported only in the Italian study (46.4%[116/250] and 11.6%[29/250], respectively). The relative rates of WHO Grade 2, 3, or 4 bleeding for PLT counts in the ranges of 0 to 4, 5 to 9, 10 to 14, and 15 to 19 (x10(9)/L) were 8.8, 1.9, 1.8, and 1.2, respectively, compared to those counts within the range of 20 to 29 (x10(9)/L). CONCLUSION: The study provides descriptive data on PLT use and frequency of bleeding. When PLT counts were 0x10(9) to 4x10(9) per L there was an eightfold increase in bleeding and a twofold risk increase when counts were 5x10(9) to 14x10(9) per L compared to the 20x10(9) to 29x10(9) per L reference range. The increased rate of bleeding at low counts occurred despite PLT therapy.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".