MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risk for Septic Death in Severe Congenital Neutropenia

2008· article· en· W2523292474 on OpenAlexaff
Laurence A. Boxer, Audrey Anna Bolyard, Peter E. Newburger, Mary Ann Bonilla, George Kannourakis, Yigal Dror, Daniel C. Link, Blanche P. Alter, Philip S. Rosenberg, David C. Dale

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBlood disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeutropeniaSepsisInternal medicinePneumoniaGranulocyte colony-stimulating factorOtitisAbsolute neutrophil countCellulitisHematopoietic stem cell transplantationPediatricsSurgeryGastroenterologyTransplantationChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We recently reported on the risk for death from sepsis and myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myeloid leukemia (MDS/AML) in patients with severe congenital neutropenia (SCN) on long-term granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) enrolled in the Severe Chronic Neutropenia International Registry (SCNIR). (Rosenberg et al, Blood2006; 107:4628-35, and Brit J Haematol2008; 140:210-3) We found that after ten years a subgroup of SCN patients receiving more than 8 mcg/kg/day of G-CSF who achieved a median absolute neutrophil count (ANC) response of less than 2.188 × 109/L had an estimated risk of dying from sepsis of 14% and a risk of developing MDS/AML of 40%. In order to understand the risk factors for death from sepsis, we reviewed the clinical diagnosis, hematological data, G-CSF treatment, and clinical course of 9 fatalities due to infections, excluding cases with evidence of MDS or AML or occurring after hematopoietic transplantation. The 5 male and 4 female patients’ ages ranges from 1 month to 18.7 years at the time of initiation of G-CSF. All were treated with G-CSF because of severe neutropenia (ANC less that 0.5 × 109/L) and a history of recurrent fevers and infections. The pre G-CSF median ANC for the 9 patients was 0.027 × 109/L and frequent events pre-G-CSF included fevers, severe mouth ulcers, otitis, sinusitis, pneumonia, cellulitis and abscess formation, but bacteremias were infrequent. When started on G-CSF, five patients were clearly poor responders, despite steady upward titration in the G-CSF dose to 22, 45, 65, 68 and 151 mcg/kg/day, respectively. In each of these patients, the ANCs on G-CSF treatment were frequently reported as less than 0.1 × 109/L and the responses were inconsistent and quite variable. The other 4 patients also had inconsistent responses at lower G-CSF doses and the patients’ compliance with treatment was uncertain. Two are known to have had a protracted “off treatment” periods, and the septic death of one patient occurred when off therapy. Deaths were attributed to sepsis (6 cases), pneumonia (2 cases), and meningitis (1 case). These clinical data suggest that death from sepsis in SCN is usually associated with a poor response to G-CSF as reflected by the requirement for dose escalation substantially above the threshold of 8 mcg/kg/day of G-CSF associated with an increased risk of MDS/AML. Inconsistent treatment and discontinuation of treatment also lead to neutropenia and the risk of sepsis. Although impaired microbicidal function may be a contributor to infections in these patients (Donini, et al. Blood109:4716, 2007), the predominant problem is a poor ANC response; the biological basis for poor responses of some SCN patients to G-CSF is still unknown. Based on these data, we recommend careful consideration of a match related or unrelated donor hematopoietic stem cell transplant for all patients not achieving a consistent ANC >1.0 × 109 with G-CSF therapy.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicBlood disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207