Early erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in preterm or low birth weight infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preterm infants have low plasma levels of erythropoietin (EPO), providing a rationale for the use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) to prevent or treat anaemia and to provide neuro protection and protection against necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). Darbepoetin (Darbe) and EPO are currently available ESAs. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of ESAs (erythropoietin (EPO) and/or Darbe) initiated early (before eight days after birth) compared with placebo or no intervention in reducing red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, adverse neurological outcomes, and feeding intolerance including necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm and/or low birth weight infants. Primary objective for studies that primarily investigate the effectiveness and safety of ESAs administered early in reducing red blood cell transfusions:To assess the effectiveness and safety of ESAs initiated early in reducing red blood cell transfusions in preterm infants. Secondary objectives:Review authors performed subgroup analyses of low (≤ 500 IU/kg/week) and high (> 500 IU/kg/week) doses of EPO and the amount of iron supplementation provided: none, low (≤ 5 mg/kg/d), and high (> 5 mg/kg/d). Primary objective for studies that primarily investigate the neuro protective effectiveness of ESAs:To assess the effectiveness and safety of ESAs initiated early in reducing adverse neurological outcomes in preterm infants. Primary objective for studies that primarily investigate the effectiveness of EPO or Darbe administered early in reducing feeding intolerance:To assess the effectiveness and safety of ESAs administered early in reducing feeding intolerance (and NEC) in preterm infants. Other secondary objectives:To compare the effectiveness of ESAs in reducing the incidence of adverse events and improving long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to 10 March 2017), Embase (1980 to 10 March 2017), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to 10 March 2017). We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of early initiation of EAS treatment versus placebo or no intervention in preterm or low birth weight infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: = 34% (low heterogeneity) for RD; 8 studies, 1283 infants). Mortality was not affected, but results show significant reductions in the incidence of intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) and periventricular leukomalacia (PVL). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Early administration of ESAs reduces the use of red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, the volume of RBCs transfused, and donor exposure after study entry. Small reductions are likely to be of limited clinical importance. Donor exposure probably is not avoided, given that all but one study included infants who had received RBC transfusions before trial entry. This update found no significant difference in the rate of ROP (stage ≥ 3) for studies that initiated EPO treatment at less than eight days of age, which has been a topic of concern in earlier versions of this review. Early EPO treatment significantly decreased rates of IVH, PVL, and NEC. Neurodevelopmental outcomes at 18 to 22 months and later varied in published studies. Ongoing research should evaluate current clinical practices that will limit donor exposure. Promising but conflicting results related to the neuro protective effect of early EPO require further study. Very different results from the two largest published trials and high heterogeneity in the analyses indicate that we should wait for the results of two ongoing large trials before drawing firm conclusions. Administration of EPO is not currently recommended because limited benefits have been identified to date. Use of darepoetin requires further study.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".