Galactomannan, β-D-Glucan, and Polymerase Chain Reaction–Based Assays for the Diagnosis of Invasive Fungal Disease in Pediatric Cancer and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We systematically reviewed and analyzed the available data for galactomannan (GM), β-D-glucan (BG), and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based assays to detect invasive fungal disease (IFD) in patients with pediatric cancer or undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation when used as screening tools during immunosuppression or as diagnostic tests in patients presenting with symptoms such as fever during neutropenia (FN). Of 1532 studies screened, 25 studies reported on GM (n = 19), BG (n = 3), and PCR (n = 11). All fungal biomarkers demonstrated highly variable sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values, and these were generally poor in both clinical settings. GM negative predictive values were high, ranging from 85% to 100% for screening and 70% to 100% in the diagnostic setting, but failure to identify non-Aspergillus molds limits its usefulness. Future work could focus on the usefulness of combinations of fungal biomarkers in pediatric cancer and HSCT.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| 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".