Outcomes of Infants Receiving Palivizumab Prophylaxis for Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Canada and Italy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection frequently results in RSV-related hospitalization (RSVH) in young infants. We examined the outcomes of palivizumab recipients within the Canadian Registry (CARESS) and the Torino-Verona Italian Registry over the 2002-2014 RSV seasons. METHODS: RSVHs were captured during the study seasons. Premature infants who received palivizumab (≤35 completed weeks' gestational age; group1) were compared with infants given palivizumab for underlying disorders regardless of gestational age (group 2). Variables and between-group incidences were analyzed. Risk factors associated with RSVH were assessed by logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 14,468 palivizumab-exposed infants were enrolled (group 1, n = 9093; group 2, n = 4856; miscellaneous, n = 519). RSVH was significantly more frequent in group 2 (211/4856, 4.34%) versus group 1 infants (216/9093, 2.37% [relative risk 1.93; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.60-2.33; P < 0.0001]). Infants with neuromuscular disorders (7.88%), airway anomalies (5.95%), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (4.75%) and hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease (4.10%) had the highest RSVH incidences. After multivariable logistic regression, only neuromuscular disease [odds ratio [OR] 4.29; 95% CI: 2.30-8.00; P < 0.01], airway anomalies (OR 3.23; 95% CI: 1.92-5.43; P < 0.01), Down syndrome (OR 2.25; 95% CI: 1.31-3.89; P < 0.01), hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease (OR 2.24; 95% CI: 1.52-3.31; P < 0.001), prematurity ≤28 completed weeks' gestational age (OR 1.82; 95% CI: 1.29-2.58; P < 0.001) and bronchopulmonary dysplasia (OR 1.81; 95% CI: 1.31-2.50; P < 0.001) significantly predicted RSVH. No significant association was detected with the number of doses administered or the time elapsed after the previous dose. CONCLUSIONS: RSVH rates are higher in infants given palivizumab for reasons other than prematurity. It is uncertain whether these findings relate to inadequate current palivizumab dosing protocols or to a specific increased RSVH risk inherent in infants with severe underlying comorbidities.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".