Ferric pyrophosphate citrate as an iron replacement agent for patients receiving hemodialysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment of anemia remains an integral component in the care of patients with end stage kidney disease receiving dialysis. Currently, both erythropoiesis stimulating agents and iron replacement agents remain important anemia management strategies for patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD). Ferric pyrophosphate citrate (FPC) was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in January 2015 as an iron replacement product in adult patients receiving long-term maintenance HD. FPC is administered to patients on HD through the dialysate. Multicenter randomized, placebo-controlled phase three clinical studies (CRUISE 1 and 2) have found dialysate FPC to maintain hemoglobin level and iron balance in patients receiving chronic HD. Adverse events were similar in both the dialysate FPC-treated and placebo groups. Another study showed a significant reduction in the prescribed erythropoietin-stimulating agents dose at the end of treatment in the dialysate FPC-treated group compared with placebo. These studies have shown that dialysate FPC is efficacious and well tolerated. In this article, we review clinical studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of FPC and also propose a protocol for iron replacement in HD units where dialysate FPC is to be used.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".