MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924814601 · doi:10.1111/ctr.13544

Invasive Aspergillosis in solid‐organ transplant recipients: Guidelines from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice

2019· article· en· W2924814601 on OpenAlexaff
Shahid Husain, José F. Camargo

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Transplantation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersAmerican Society of Transplantation
KeywordsMedicineVoriconazoleAspergillosisGalactomannanLung transplantationTransplantationIntensive care medicineOrgan transplantationInternal medicineZygomycosisLungCryptococcosisLiver transplantationAmphotericin BImmunologyAntifungalDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

These updated AST-IDCOP guidelines provide information on epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of Aspergillus after organ transplantation. Aspergillus is the most common invasive mold infection in solid-organ transplant (SOT) recipients, and it is the most common invasive fungal infection among lung transplant recipients. Time from transplant to diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis (IA) is variable, but most cases present within the first year post-transplant, with shortest time to onset among liver and heart transplant recipients. The overall 12-week mortality of IA in SOT exceeds 20%; prognosis is worse among those with central nervous system involvement or disseminated disease. Bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan is preferred for the diagnosis of IA in lung and non-lung transplant recipients, in combination with other diagnostic modalities (eg, chest CT scan, culture). Voriconazole remains the drug of choice to treat IA, with isavuconazole and lipid formulations of amphotericin B regarded as alternative agents. The role of combination antifungals for primary therapy of IA remains controversial. Either universal prophylaxis or preemptive therapy is recommended in lung transplant recipients, whereas targeted prophylaxis is favored in liver and heart transplant recipients. In these guidelines, we also discuss newer antifungals and diagnostic tests, antifungal susceptibility testing, and special patient populations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations290
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical TransplantationSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207