Implications of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Warning against the Use of Sildenafil for the Treatment of Pediatric Pulmonary Hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) contributes to disability and death in children with diverse cardiac, pulmonary, or systemic diseases, and therapeutic options are currently limited. Data from adult studies provide the basis for most PAH-specific therapies; however, many of these medications are commonly used in children on an off-label basis due to the life-threatening nature of PAH. Although currently approved for use in adult PAH, sildenafil is used extensively off-label for the treatment of neonates, infants, and children with PAH. Past studies have generally suggested favorable effects and outcomes in infants and young children with PAH, but these reports are generally uncontrolled observations, except for one single-center trial for persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn. Despite extensive clinical experience with sildenafil therapy in children and approval by the European Medicines Agency for its pediatric use in Europe, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently issued a warning against the use of sildenafil for pediatric PAH between 1 and 17 years of age due to an apparent increase in mortality during long-term therapy. Although these data are extremely limited, this U.S. Food and Drug Administration review challenges the pediatric PAH community to further assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil, especially with chronic treatment. Although low doses of sildenafil are likely safe in pediatric PAH, further studies should carefully examine its role in the long-term therapy of children, especially with diverse causes of PAH. Pediatric patients with PAH require close surveillance and frequent monitoring, and persistent sildenafil monotherapy is likely insufficient with disease progression.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
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".