Safety of gadobutrol in more than 1,000 pediatric patients: subanalysis of the GARDIAN study, a global multicenter prospective non-interventional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gadobutrol is a gadolinium-based contrast agent, uniquely formulated at 1.0 mmol/ml. Although there is extensive safety evidence on the use of gadobutrol in adults, few studies have addressed the safety and tolerability of gadobutrol in pediatric patients. OBJECTIVE: This subanalysis of data from the GARDIAN study evaluated the safety and use of gadobutrol in pediatric patients (age <18 years). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The GARDIAN study was a large phase IV non-interventional prospective multicenter post-authorization safety study performed in Europe, Asia, North America and Africa. A total of 23,708 patients were included who were scheduled to undergo cranial or spinal MRI, liver or kidney MRI, or MR angiography with gadobutrol enhancement. The primary study endpoint was the overall incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) following gadobutrol administration. RESULTS: The GARDIAN study included 1,142 children (age <18 years) who received gadobutrol at a mean dose of 0.13 (range 0.04-0.50) mmol/kg body weight. Gadobutrol was well tolerated in these children, with low rates of ADRs (0.5%) and no SAEs, consistent with results in adults enrolled in the GARDIAN study. Rates of adverse events and ADRs were unrelated to pediatric age or gadobutrol weight-adjusted dose. There were no symptoms suggestive of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. Investigators rated the contrast quality of gadobutrol-enhanced images as good or excellent in 97.8% of pediatric patients, similar to the main study population. CONCLUSION: Gadobutrol is very well tolerated and provides excellent contrast quality at the recommended weight-adjusted dose in children (age <18 years), similar to the profile in adults.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".