MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898129608 · doi:10.1155/2018/6037494

Is There a Role for Biweekly Romiplostim in the Management of Chronic Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP)? A Report of Three Cases

2018· article· en· W2898129608 on OpenAlexaff
Jasjit Rooprai, Karima Khamisa

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Hematology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomiplostimMedicineDosingThrombopoietinPlateletImmune thrombocytopeniaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Romiplostim is a peptibody, which stimulates platelet production by a mechanism similar to that of endogenous thrombopoietin. It has an established indication as second-line therapy in patients with chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). The agent is typically administered weekly; however, there are instances where a biweekly (i.e., alternate week) dosing may be feasible in a select group of patients. We conducted a retrospective case review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biweekly administration of romiplostim in maintaining a platelet count of >30 × 109/L in three patients with chronic ITP. Treatment was started with a weekly injection (1 µg/kg) with a dose escalation to achieve a platelet count >30 × 109/L. Once stable on weekly romiplostim, these patients received biweekly administration. No bleeding complications were noted during biweekly dosing for these patients. The current findings suggest that lengthening the dose interval of romiplostim is feasible in select patients with chronic ITP to maintain stable platelet counts. Additional studies are therefore warranted to further evaluate biweekly dosing for romiplostim to increase convenience and decrease costs for patients with chronic ITP.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in HematologySame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207