MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803381936 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfy104.sao048

SaO048PROCALCITONIN IN END-STAGE KIDNEY DISEASE: DEFINING EXPECTED RANGES

2018· article· en· W2803381936 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Dorval, Gabriel Girouard, Ihssan Bouhtiauy, Jason Harquail, Jeffrey Gaudet, Katherine Pettipas, Antoine Béland, Mathieu Bélanger

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Research and Pathophysiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeVitalité Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEnd-stage kidney diseaseKidney diseaseEnd stage renal diseaseStage (stratigraphy)DiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Procalcitonin (PCT) has been shown, particularly in the context of sepsis and respiratory diseases and the settings of intensive care and emergency department units, to be a powerful biomarker for diagnosis and management of infectious diseases in the general population. At normally undetectable levels (i.e. < 0.1 ng/ml), a PCT elevation greater than 0.5 ng/ml is then very suggestive of bacterial infection and its lowering is associated with treatment response. Renal failure (RF) is however known to affect PCT levels. Various higher PCT threshold levels have been proposed to make adjustments to published PCT guided care algorithms in RF patients, although these are supported by weak evidence. METHODS: To enhance understanding of RF’s effect on PCT levels and to explore PCT’s effectiveness as a biomarker in RF population, we have been conducting a single centre prospective blinded cohort study in prevalent end-stage kidney disease (ESRD) patients on hemodialysis (HD), in stable and unstable condition, with repeated PCT sampling over three months and followed up to one year since March 2016. Data used in this initial cross-sectional analysis are from the baseline assessment of all stable patients recruited thus far. RESULTS: 132 (83 men (67%), 49 women (37%)) patients with a mean age of 68 years (range 19-93) and a 45-month ESRD vintage (range 1-223) were included. Of these, 72 (55%) had diabetes mellitus (Db) and 85 (64%) had some form of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Their mean body mass index (BMI) was 29 kg/m2 (range 16.6 - 52.7). They received, on average, 12 hours of HD weekly (range 8 - 16) with a mean Kt/V of 1.54 (range 0.1 - 2.67). Their mean baseline PCT level was 0.47 ng/ml (< 0.1 - 3.44) with an asymmetric distribution skewed to the right (median 0.3 ng/ml, mode < 0.1 ng/ml). Univariate analyses revealed PCT to be statistically positively correlated with ESRD vintage, BMI, HD weekly duration, albuminemia, alkaline phosphatase, calcitonin, c-reactive protein (CRP), creatinine, leukocytes count, urea (pre-HD) and negatively correlated with age. No correlation was found with gender, Db, CVD, Kt/V, calcemia, phosphatemia, PTH, hemoglobin or ferritin levels. In a multivariate model, only ESRD vintage, HD weekly duration, albuminemia, alkaline phosphatase, CRP and creatinine correlations remained statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These results corroborate that RF affects PCT levels widely, most likely due to a priming effect related to ESRD-HD inflammatory and mineral and bone metabolism disorders rather than a decrease in PCT clearance. They support the need to use a higher PCT level threshold in ESRD(HD) patients, though PCT’s effectiveness as a biomarker in this population and critical threshold levels cannot yet be specified from these findings. Future results of this on-going cohort study will seek to determine, in even greater confidence, expected PCT level ranges of stable and unstable ESRD(HD) patients and their determining 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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicBiomedical Research and PathophysiologyFrench-language works237,207