MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2470101680 · doi:10.1155/2016/9874261

Eculizumab for the Treatment of Severe Antibody-Mediated Rejection: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

2016· article· en· W2470101680 on OpenAlexaff
Duy Tran, Anne Boucher, Suzon Collette, Alexis Payette, Virginie Royal, Lynne Senécal

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Transplantation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEculizumabMedicineThrombotic microangiopathyTransplantationKidney transplantationBiopsyRenal functionAntibodyRegimenGastroenterologySurgeryInternal medicineDiseaseImmunologyComplement system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In renal transplantation, treatment options for antibody-mediated rejection are limited. Here, we report a case of severe AMR treated with eculizumab. A 50-year-old woman known for end stage kidney disease secondary to IgA nephropathy received a kidney transplant from a 50-year-old deceased donor. At 5 months after transplantation, she presented with acute graft dysfunction and biopsy showed a severe antibody-mediated rejection associated with thrombotic microangiopathy. Despite an aggressive conventional immunosuppressive regimen, signs of rejection persisted and the patient was treated with 3 doses of eculizumab. Following the therapy, markers of TMA improved and graft function stabilized. However, ongoing signs of rejection remained in the repeated biopsy. In kidney transplantation, eculizumab is an expensive treatment and its role in the treatment of antibody-mediated rejection remains to be determined.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in TransplantationSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207