Duration of Corticosteroid Tapering as First Line Treatment In Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Abstract 3688 Background: Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP) is a relatively common benign hematologic disorder. Management of ITP is difficult as many treatment regimens present risks that may pose more harm than the disease itself. Typically, corticosteroid is used as first line treatment, but there is currently no evidence-based guideline to direct the optimal duration of therapy. Objective: To investigate the effectiveness and relative safety of various lengths of corticosteroid therapy. Methods: In a retrospective cohort study, charts of all ITP patients seen in the general hematology clinic at the London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC) from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009 were reviewed. Results : A total of 312 patients with ITP were reviewed. 128 of the patients (52 male, 76 female), age range 4–94 at time of diagnosis, required corticosteroid treatment. Of those, 35 patients were treated with short term steroid regimen (< 8 weeks); 32 patients had 8–16 weeks of therapy, and 64 patients received long term steroid tapering regimen (>16 weeks). Based on results, 63%, 56% and 39% of patients achieved complete response in each group respectively. The follow-up duration from diagnosis ranged from 1 month to 29 years (with median of 1 year). Interestingly, the same proportion of patients experienced side effects as a result of steroid use in all groups. However, frequency of serious complications such as avascular necrosis and infections, occurred at a higher rate in the long term therapy group (9%) compared to 0% in short term therapy group. Conclusions: Rapid corticosteroid taper is as effective as a slow corticosteroid taper and has less serious side effects. 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".