Intradonor reproducibility and changes in hemolytic variables during red blood cell storage: results of recall phase of the REDS‐III RBC‐Omics study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genetic determinants may underlie the susceptibility of red blood cells (RBCs) to hemolyze in vivo and during routine storage. This study characterized the reproducibility and dynamics of in vitro hemolysis variables from a subset of the 13,403 blood donors enrolled in the RBC-Omics study. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: RBC-Omics donors with either low or high hemolysis results on 4°C-stored leukoreduced (LR)-RBC samples from enrollment donations stored for 39 to 42 days were recalled 2 to 12 months later to donate LR-RBCs. Samples of stored LR-RBCs from the unit and from transfer bags were evaluated for spontaneous and stress-induced hemolysis at selected storage time points. Intradonor reproducibility of hemolysis variables was evaluated in transfer bags over two donations. Hemolysis data at serial storage time points were generated on LR-RBCs from parent bags and analyzed by site, sex, race/ethnicity, and donation frequency. RESULTS: A total of 664 donors were successfully recalled. Analysis of intradonor reproducibility revealed that osmotic and oxidative hemolysis demonstrated good and moderate reproducibility (Pearson's r = 0.85 and r = 0.53, respectively), while spontaneous hemolysis reproducibility was poor (r = 0.40). Longitudinal hemolysis in parent bags showed large increases over time in spontaneous (508.6%) and oxidative hemolysis (399.8%) and smaller increases in osmotic (9.4%) and mechanical fragility (3.4%; all p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Spontaneous hemolysis is poorly reproducible in donors over time and may depend on site processing methods, while oxidative and osmotic hemolysis were reproducible in donors and hence could reflect consistent heritable phenotypes attributable to genetic traits. Spontaneous and oxidative hemolysis increased over time of storage, whereas osmotic and mechanical hemolysis remained relatively stable.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".