Long-Term Follow up of Children with Apalstic Anemia Treated with Immunosuppressive Therapy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Immunosuppressive therapy (IST) is the alternative first line treatment in children with aplastic anemia (AA) who have no HLA match siblings available. The long-term outcome of patients with AA who survive after IST is unknown. We evaluated outcomes of children with AA treated with IST at long-term follow up. Methods: we retrospectively reviewed the hospital records of children with AA from 1984 to 2004, treated at our institution with horse-derived antithymocyte globulin (hATG) 160 mg/Kg over 4 days, short course of prednisone and cyclosporine (CS). Results: Forty two patients were treated with IST (25 boys, 18 girls). The median age at diagnosis was 8.5 years. Twenty nine (69%), eight (19%) and five (12%) patients were diagnosed with severe, very severe, and moderate AA, respectively. Nine patients (21%) had hepatitis associated AA. Twenty seven patients (64%) received one course of ATG and fifteen (36%) received 2 courses (8 received 2 courses of hATG and 7 received 1 course hATG and 1 course rabbit derived ATG). Eleven patients (26%) required G-CSF. Median follow up time was 53.3 months (range 3–244 months). Twenty six patients (62%) had a complete response (CR), eight (19%) had a partial response (PR) and eight (19%) had no response (NR). Two patients relapsed after one course of IST and needed a second course of IST and both of them had a partial response. Median time to discontinuation of CS was 13 months. Nine patients (21%) died (7 with NR and 2 with PR) and 33 patients (79%) are alive. Two patients developed myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) 21 and 19 months post IST; both received long-term G-CSF (18 and 14 months) and had PR after 2 courses of IST. Five of 33 patients (15%) who survived had significant hypertension after CS was discontinued and one required continuous antihypertensive medication. Conclusion: The results of this study shows promising response in children with AA treated with IST. Hypertension and MDS are late complication. Longer follow up in these patients is warranted to definite the accurate rates of the late complications and risk factors.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".