Plasma vitamin C levels in ESRD patients and occurrence of hypochromic erythrocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The achievement of erythropoiesis in hemodialysis (HD) patients is typically managed with erythropoiesis-stimulating-agents (ESA's) and intravenous iron (IV-iron). Using this treatment strategy, HD patients frequently show an elevated fraction of red blood cells (RBC) with hemoglobin (Hb) content per cell that is below the normal range, called hypochromic RBC. The low Hb content per RBC is the result of the clinical challenge of providing sufficient iron content to the bone marrow during erythropoiesis. Vitamin C supplements have been used to increase Hb levels in HD patients with refractory anemia, which supports the hypothesis that vitamin C mobilizes iron needed for Hb synthesis. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in 149 prevalent HD patients of the percent hypochromic RBC, defined as RBC with Hb < 300 ng/uL of packed RBC, in relation to plasma vitamin C levels. We also measured high-sensitivity CRP, (hs-CRP), iron, and ferritin levels. and calculated ESA dose. FINDINGS: High plasma levels of vitamin C were negatively associated with hypochromic RBC (P < 0.003), and high ESA doses were positively associated (P < 0.001). There was no significant association of hs-CRP with percent hypochromic RBC. DISCUSSION: This finding supports the hypothesis that vitamin C mobilizes iron stores, improves iron delivery to the bone marrow, and increase the fraction of RBC with normal Hb content. Further research is warranted on development of protocols for safe and effective use of supplemental vitamin C for management of renal anemia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".