Association of Pretransplant Serum Phosphorus with Posttransplant Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Serum phosphorus levels are associated with mortality, cardiovascular disease, and renal function loss in individuals with and without chronic kidney disease. The association of pretransplant serum phosphorus levels with transplant outcomes is not clear. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Data of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) up to June 2007 were linked to the database (2001 through 2006) of one of the U.S.-based large dialysis organizations (DaVita). The selected 9384 primary kidney recipients were divided into five groups according to pretransplant serum phosphorus levels (mg/dl): <3.5, 3.5 to <5.5 (reference group), 5.5 to <7.5, 7.5 to <9.5, and ≥9.5. Unadjusted and multivariate adjusted risks for transplant outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Patients were 48 ± 14 years old and included 37% women and 27% African Americans. After multivariate adjustment, all-cause and cardiovascular death hazard ratios were 2.44 (95% confidence interval: 1.28 to 4.65) and 3.63 (1.13 to 11.64), respectively, in recipients in the ≥9.5 group; allograft loss hazard ratios were 1.42 (1.04 to 1.95) and 2.36 (1.33 to 4.17) in recipients with 7.5 to >9.5 and ≥9.5, respectively. No significant association with delayed graft function was found. CONCLUSIONS: Pretransplant phosphorus levels 7.5 to <9.5 mg/dl and ≥9.5 mg/dl were associated with increased risk of functional graft failure and increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular deaths, respectively, when compared with 3.5 to <5.5 mg/dl. Additional studies are needed to examine whether more aggressive control of pretransplant serum phosphorus may improve posttransplant outcomes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".