Phosphate‐binding efficacy of crushed vs. chewed lanthanum carbonate in hemodialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lanthanum carbonate, a chewable noncalcium-containing phosphorus (P) binder, is useful for treating secondary hyperparathyroidism in patients who have hypercalcemia and cannot swallow whole tablets. However, some patients cannot chew tablets or prefer to crush and mix them with food. This study was conducted to determine the P-binding efficacy of crushed lanthanum and compare it with chewed lanthanum in hemodialysis (HD) patients. After a 1-week washout period, 11 hemodialysis patients (7 men, 4 women) were randomized to receive, in a crossover fashion, lanthanum 1000 mg 3 times daily chewed with meals and lanthanum 1000 mg 3 times daily crushed into a fine powder, mixed with applesauce and taken with meals, for 4 weeks each. Serum P was measured at the end of each washout (baseline) and weekly during treatment. Changes in serum P from baseline for crushed lanthanum were compared with chewed lanthanum using paired sample t test. Administration of crushed lanthanum resulted in a significant reduction in serum P from baseline (P reduction [mg/dL] for crushed lanthanum in week 1: 2.1 ± 0.4, week 2: 1.7 ± 0.5, week 3: 1.7 ± 0.5, week 4: 1.7 ± 0.4, P<0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in serum P reduction from baseline and serum P attained during treatment with crushed when compared with chewed lanthanum. Crushed lanthanum is effective in reducing serum P and have similar P-binding efficacy to chewed lanthanum. Crushing lanthanum and mixing it with food can thus be an option for patients who are unable to chew or swallow whole tablets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".