Long-term outcomes of dasatinib-induced pulmonary arterial hypertension: a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to describe the long-term outcomes of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) induced by dasatinib. 21 incident, right heart catheterisation-confirmed cases of dasatinib-induced PAH were identified from the French Pulmonary Hypertension Registry. Clinical and haemodynamic variables were compared from baseline to last follow-up (median (range) 24 (1–81) months). Median age was 52 years and 15 patients were female (71%). 19 patients received dasatinib for chronic myelogenous leukaemia for a median (range) duration of 42 (8–74) months before PAH diagnosis. No bone morphogenic protein receptor-2 (BMPR2) mutations were found in the 10 patients tested. Dasatinib was uniformly discontinued and 11 patients received PAH medications. Four patients died during follow-up. New York Heart Association functional class improved from 76% in class III/IV to 90% in class I/II (p<0.01). Median (range) 6-min walk distance improved from 306 (0–660) to 430 (165–635) m (p<0.01). Median (range) mean pulmonary arterial pressure improved from 45 (30–70) to 26 (17–50) mmHg (p<0.01) and pulmonary vascular resistance from 6.1 (3.2–27.3) to 2.6 (1.2–5.9) Wood units (p<0.01). Patients treated with PAH medications had worse baseline haemodynamics but similar long-term outcomes to untreated patients. PAH persisted in 37% of patients. Dasatinib-induced PAH frequently improves after discontinuation but persisted in over one-third of patients, therefore systematic follow-up is essential.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".