Survey on the use of methotrexate by pediatric rheumatologists in Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine methotrexate (MTX) use and the degree to which Canadian pediatric rheumatologists adhere to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guidelines on monitoring for MTX toxicity. METHODS: A 20-item questionnaire was e-mailed to 37 pediatric rheumatologists in 17 centers in Canada. A total of 28 (75.7%) responded. RESULTS: The oral route (PO) of administration was preferred initially by 78.6% in most cases, but for more severe cases, this fell to 42.8%. Those who chose not to start PO used the subcutaneous route (SQ). When PO was initial treatment, a switch to SQ was undertaken because of dose escalation, lack of efficacy, or GI toxicity. An initial mean dose of 0.35-0.5 mg/kg/wk was prescribed by 51.8%. For 75%, the maximum dose was 1 mg/kg/wk (up to 25 mg). Complete blood count, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) were determined by 100% at baseline and in followup; albumin and creatinine by 85.7% at baseline, but by only 71.4% and 67.8%, respectively, in followup. After a change in dose, 96.3% requested blood tests at least monthly; this was extended to every 6 to 8 weeks by 78.6% when the dose was stable. Side effects of recurrent nausea and/or vomiting were reported to occur frequently. No severe toxicity, and in particular no case of cirrhosis, was reported. Prophylactic folate supplementation was prescribed by almost all physicians. CONCLUSION: Most Canadian pediatric rheumatologists follow ACR guidelines to monitor for MTX toxicity in children with rheumatic diseases who were prescribed MTX. The variation in monitoring and response to toxicity raises the question whether specific pediatric guidelines should be developed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".