MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167200968 · doi:10.14785/lpsn-2015-0002

A prospective outcome study of patients with profound combined immunodeficiency (P-CID)

2015· article· en· W2167200968 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carsten Speckmann, Annette Uhlmann, Sam Doerken, Martin Wolkewitz, Annette Pohl, Stephan Ehl

Bibliographic record

VenueLymphoSign Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProspective cohort studyHematopoietic stem cell transplantationQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicinePrimary immunodeficiencyPediatricsTransplantationImmunodeficiencyObservational studyCohort studyImmune systemImmunologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a prospective outcome study of patients with profound combined immunodeficiency (P-CID) (study number DRKS00000497). Combined immunodeficiencies (CID) are a heterogeneous group of inherited immune disorders with impaired T-cell development and (or) function manifesting through increased susceptibility to infections and (or) immune dysregulation. They can be delineated from severe CID (SCID) by their manifestation beyond the first year of life. Profound CID (P-CID) is a potentially life-threatening form of CID, in which stem cell transplant (SCT) is a relevant consideration at diagnosis. The primary objective of the study is to provide natural history data on patients with P-CID, irrespective of whether they undergo hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) or not. The goals are to determine survival, the frequency of severe events, and quality of life (QOL) 5 years after study inclusion. The secondary objective is to develop a risk model for P-CID patients. The model is developed from a set of clinical and laboratory parameters obtained at diagnosis, at study inclusion, and yearly thereafter. The tertiary objectives of this study are to determine the effects of donor, recipient, and treatment factors on the outcome of HSCT. The goal is to determine the quality of engraftment and immunological reconstitution and to determine the effects of these parameters on clinical outcome. The main hypothesis is that P-CID patients undergoing early HSCT have a better 5-year survival rate than patients who undergo late HSCT or are not transplanted. This is a prospective multi-centre international cohort study (observational study). Enrolled patients will be evaluated and treated according to local institutional protocols. They will receive comparable baseline and follow-up evaluations across all participating centres, irrespective of the therapeutic strategy at the individual site. There will be at least 6 study visits (scheduled yearly) for all patients. Because of the variable history prior to study inclusion, a morbidity score is determined for each patient at study visit 1. For those patients undergoing HSCT, an additional 6 month post-HSCT visit will be scheduled. The study visits will document immunological parameters, severe events including major infections, and major manifestations of immune dysregulation, severe transplant-related events, and QOL.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLymphoSign JournalSame topicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune DisordersFrench-language works237,207