A risk‐stratified approach to cytomegalovirus prevention in pediatric solid organ transplant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimal strategies to prevent cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease following pediatric solid organ transplantation remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to review the outcomes of a risk-stratified strategy that uses a hybrid or prophylactic strategy for donor (D)+ recipient (R)- patients, a preemptive strategy for D+R+/D-R+, and clinical follow-up alone for D-R+ patients. A retrospective chart review was undertaken at the Stollery Children's Hospital in Edmonton, Alberta for pediatric solid organ transplants 2004 through 2010. Transplants were risk-stratified according to D/R CMV serostatus, organ group, and type of induction or rejection immunosuppression. The incidence of DNAemia and CMV disease and adverse effects from prophylaxis were analyzed. The study included 197 recipients. CMV DNAemia was detected in 49 of 197 recipients (24.8%), and CMV disease occurred in eight of 197 (4%) of which all but one were D+R-. All recovered. Seventeen of 142 recipients who received prophylaxis (12%) had hematologic toxicity. No other toxicities were identified. In conclusion, A risk-stratified approach resulted in very low rates of CMV disease with minimal adverse effects. Lowering the dosage rather than stopping antivirals in the face of neutropenia has the potential to further lower the rate of CMV disease.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".