MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164307384 · doi:10.1086/653606

Comparison of 2 Doses of Liposomal Amphotericin B and Conventional Amphotericin B Deoxycholate for Treatment of AIDS‐Associated Acute Cryptococcal Meningitis: A Randomized, Double‐Blind Clinical Trial of Efficacy and Safety

2010· article· en· W2164307384 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard J. Hamill, Jack D. Sobel, Wafaa El‐Sadr, Philip C. Johnson, John R. Graybill, Kedarnath Javaly, David E. Barker

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Infections and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAmphotericin BCryptococcal meningitisMeningitisRandomized controlled trialAmphotericin B deoxycholateClinical trialSurgeryAntifungalInternal medicineImmunologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Viral diseaseDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND. It is generally acknowledged that amphotericin B is the most effective treatment for cryptococcal meningitis. However, administration of this drug is accompanied by substantial adverse effects. This double-blind study, performed before the routine availability of highly active antiretroviral therapy, was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of liposomal amphotericin B to conventional amphotericin deoxycholate in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) and acute cryptococcal meningitis. METHODS. Patients were randomized (ratio, 1:1:1) from multiple sites in the United States and Canada to receive either amphotericin B at 0.7 mg/kg/day (n = 87), liposomal amphotericin B at 3 mg/kg/day (n = 86), or liposomal amphotericin B at 6 mg/kg/day (n = 94). RESULTS. Efficacy was similar among all 3 treatment groups. The overall incidence of infusion-related reactions was significantly lower for both the 3 mg/kg/day and 6 mg/kg/day dosages of liposomal amphotericin B, compared with conventional amphotericin B (P < .001). Significantly fewer patients who received the 3 mg/kg/day dosage of liposomal amphotericin B developed nephrotoxicity, indicated by a doubling of the serum creatinine value, compared with recipients of conventional amphotericin B (P = .004). Overall mortality at 10 weeks was 11.6%, with no significant differences among the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS. Liposomal amphotericin B provides an equally efficacious alternative to conventional amphotericin B deoxycholate in patients with AIDS and acute cryptococcal meningitis. Liposomal amphotericin B at a dosage of 3 mg/kg/day is accompanied by significantly fewer adverse effects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations174
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicFungal Infections and StudiesFrench-language works237,207