MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Evaluation of Varicella Zoster Prophylaxis after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Using Valacyclovir Followed By Vaccination

2015· article· en· W2509149168 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kareem Jamani, Andrew Daly, Jan Storek

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaricella zoster virusCumulative incidenceRashDiscontinuationTransplantationDiseaseVaccinationInternal medicinePediatricsSurgeryImmunologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rationale: Varicella zoster virus (VZV) disease occurs frequently post allo-HCT. While cutaneous disease is often complicated by debilitating post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN), visceral or CNS disease can be fatal. Studies have demonstrated that VZV disease is reduced during prophylaxis with acyclovir; however, patients frequently develop VZV disease after discontinuation of acyclovir. Recently, the varicella vaccine has been found to be safe and immunogenic post allo-HCT. The optimal prophylactic strategy for VZV disease post allo-HCT has not been established. Here we present a retrospective single-center study, comparing pre-2007 prophylaxis, which consisted of less than 2 years of post allo-HCT acyclovir, with post-2007 prophylaxis, which consisted of 2 years of valacyclovir prophylaxis followed by live attenuated varicella vaccination. Objective: To evaluate the hypothesis that the cohort treated with the pre-2007 strategy ("old strategy") had a higher cumulative incidence of VZV disease and PHN compared to the cohort treated with the post-2007 strategy ("new strategy"). Methodology: Charts of patients undergoing allo-HCT in Calgary between January 2004 and June 2011 were reviewed. VZV disease was defined as clinical zoster or visceral/CNS disease confirmed by immunostain or PCR. PHN was defined as pain in the affected dermatome persisting more than 3 months after the onset of the rash. Cumulative incidence of VZV disease and PHN were compared using competing risks regression (Fine-Gray), treating relapse, graft failure, second malignancy and death as competing risks. Results: 482 patients underwent first allo-HCT in Calgary during the review period. 21 were excluded due to inadequate data. 119 were treated with the new strategy, 116 with the old strategy and 226 experienced a competing event while on prophylaxis. Some patients in the old strategy group received late VZV vaccination (at >2 years). The old strategy was associated with a trend towards higher cumulative incidence of VZV disease (sHR 1.57, 95% CI 0.95-2.62, p=0.08) and with significantly higher cumulative incidence of PHN (sHR 9.94, 95% CI 1.24-80.05, p=0.03). 3 episodes of VZV disease in the old strategy group and 7 episodes in the new strategy group were associated with deviation from protocol (most associated with medication noncompliance). When events associated with protocol deviation were excluded, the old strategy led to a significantly higher cumulative incidence of VZV disease (HR 2.40, 95% CI 1.32-4.38, p=0.004) and PHN was not observed in the new group (p= <0.01). Vaccination was safe; however 10% of patients developed immediate or late cutaneous VZV disease. PHN was not observed in the patients who developed the VZV disease post vaccination. Conclusions: The new strategy was associated with a trend towards less VZV disease and significantly less PHN. Noncompliance was a significant contributor to VZV disease in the new strategy group. If compliance is ensured, the new strategy significantly reduces VZV disease and eliminates PHN. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments→French-language works237,207→