MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fondaparinux Versus Argatroban and Danaparoid for the Treatment of Suspected or Confirmed Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia: A Propensity Score Analysis.

2012· article· en· W2566972574 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Kang, Majed Alahmadi, Sonja Sawh, Michael J. Kovacs, Alejandro Lazo‐Langner

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis
Canadian institutionsVictoria HospitalWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArgatrobanFondaparinuxMedicineHeparin-induced thrombocytopeniaHeparinThrombosisInternal medicineAnticoagulantLepirudinSubgroup analysisPopulationSurgeryConfidence intervalPlateletVenous thromboembolism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 2262 Background: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a complication of heparin therapy leading to platelet activation, thrombocytopenia and potentially thrombosis. Upon suspicion, current guidelines recommend heparin cessation and switching to a non-heparin anticoagulant such as argatroban or danaparoid. Fondaparinux could be potentially effective but information supporting its use is limited. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 239 patients admitted to London Health Sciences Centre from January 10, 2004 to June 21, 2011 receiving a non-heparin anticoagulant (133 fondaparinux, 59 danaparoid, 47 argatroban) for suspected or confirmed HIT. Using logistic regression a propensity score was constructed based on age, gender, creatinine, 4T scores and comorbidities (assessed by the Charlson comorbidity index modified by Quan) and used to match 133 patients to 60 controls. Efficacy outcome was thrombosis or thrombosis-related death. Safety outcome was major bleeding. Group comparisons were done using χ2, Fisher's exact or Mann-Whitney tests. Survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method. Analyses were conducted in SPSS 20.0 and R 2.12. Results: Population characteristics are shown in Table 1. Well-balanced groups were obtained after matching. There were no differences in the proportion of thrombotic or bleeding events between control and fondaparinux groups (Table 2). Subgroup analyses comparing fondaparinux versus argatroban or danaparoid and unmatched analyses showed similar results. Sensitivity analysis stratified by propensity score quintiles showed no differences in either outcome. Survival analysis showed no differences in thrombosis or bleeding (Log-rank p = 0.415 and 0.779, respectively; Figure 1). Subgroup survival analysis for the 3 drugs independently found no difference in thrombotic events (Log-rank p=0.582) and a trend towards increased major bleeding in patients on argatroban (Log-rank p=0.068). In the fondaparinux group 60% of patients received prophylactic doses. Conclusion: Fondaparinux has similar effectiveness and safety as argatroban and danaparoid in patients with suspected HIT. Prophylactic fondaparinux doses seem to be effective if no indication for full anticoagulation exists. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Fondaparinux as a treatment option in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Lazo-Langner:Pfizer: Honoraria; LeoPharma: Honoraria.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHeparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and ThrombosisFrench-language works237,207