MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2196382270 · doi:10.3324/haematol.2014.121475

The international prospective Glanzmann Thrombasthenia Registry: treatment modalities and outcomes in non-surgical bleeding episodes in Glanzmann thrombasthenia patients

2015· article· en· W2196382270 on OpenAlexaff
Giovanni Di Minno, R. B. Zotz, Roseline d’Oiron, Niels Bindslev, Matteo Nicola Dario Di Minno, M.‐C. Poon

Bibliographic record

VenueHaematologica · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCalgary General HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersNovo Nordisk
KeywordsMedicineGlanzmann's thrombastheniaThrombastheniaPlateletPlatelet transfusionAdverse effectAntifibrinolyticSurgeryTranexamic acidRecombinant DNAInternal medicineGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Standard treatment for Glanzmann thrombasthenia is platelet transfusion. Recombinant activated factor VII has been shown to be successful in patients with Glanzmann thrombasthenia with platelet antibodies or who are refractory to platelet transfusions. The Glanzmann Thrombasthenia Registry prospectively collected worldwide information on the effectiveness and safety of platelet transfusion, recombinant activated factor VII and/or antifibrinolytics for the treatment of bleeds in patients with Glanzmann thrombasthenia. Data relating to 829 non-surgical bleeding episodes were entered into the Glanzmann Thrombasthenia Registry (severe/moderate: 216/613; spontaneous/post-traumatic: 630/199). Recombinant activated factor VII alone was used in 124/829 bleeds, recombinant activated factor VII+antifibrinolytics in 107/829, platelets±antifibrinolytics in 312/829, antifibrinolytics alone in 219/829, and recombinant activated factor VII+platelets±antifibrinolytics in 67/829. The proportion of successful treatments to stop bleeding was 91.0% in cases treated with recombinant activated factor VII only, 82.7% for recombinant activated factor VII+antifibrinolytics, 72.7% for treatment with recombinant activated factor VII+platelets±antifibrinolytics, 78.8% for platelets±antifibrinolytics and 84.7% for antifibrinolytics alone. Treatment failure was documented in 18 bleeding events (2% of the total treatments), the majority of which were in patients receiving treatment with antifibrinolytics; bleeding re-started in 6% of bleeds after initial effective treatment. Thirty-five adverse events were reported, none of which was a thromboembolic event. Among treatments that included recombinant activated factor VII, only one patient reported three possibly drug-related non-serious adverse events (nausea, dyspnea and headache). To conclude, non-surgical bleeds were common and often severe in Glanzmann thrombasthenia; both platelets and recombinant activated factor VII appeared to be effective, and with good safety profiles, for the treatment of non-surgical bleeds. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01476423.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations51
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaematologicaSame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207