CD4+ T‐cell lymphopenia in frequent platelet donors who have ceased platelet donation for at least 1 year
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We recently discovered that 30% of current frequent apheresis platelet donors in a study at our donor center had CD4+ counts below 200 cells/μL. How long CD4+ lymphopenia persists after ceasing plateletpheresis is unknown. Whether there are infectious or other complications in former frequent donors that could relate to CD4+ lymphopenia is also unknown. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We mailed a letter to former frequent apheresis platelet donors who had not donated platelets for at least 12 months. Frequent donation was defined as 20 to 24 plateletpheresis sessions in at least one 365-day period starting in 2011. Donors who expressed interest in the study were contacted to schedule a study visit. Participants in the study provided a blood sample and completed a health questionnaire that included questions about opportunistic infections and malignancies. RESULTS: Of 50 potential study candidates who were mailed a letter, 15 participated in the study. There were 2 participants with CD4+ counts below 200 cells/μL, one of whom had prior counts that documented a small improvement with cessation of plateletpheresis. Three participants had counts between 200 and 300 cells/μL. No study participant had a history of an opportunistic infection or a malignancy associated with immune dysregulation. CONCLUSION: We detected CD4+ lymphopenia in former frequent apheresis platelet donors who had ceased platelet donation for more than 1 year. There was no evidence that the CD4+ lymphopenia predisposes to opportunistic infections or to malignancies associated with immune dysregulation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".