Safety and efficacy of prophylaxis for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia involving trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole dose reduction in kidney transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) is the drug of choice for anti-Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PcP) prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients (KTR). Post-transplant management balances preventing PcP with managing TMP-SMX-related adverse effects. TMP-SMX dose reduction addresses adverse effects but its implications to incident PcP are unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all patients transplanted between 2011 and 2015 prescribed daily single strength TMP-SMX for twelve months post-transplantation as PcP prophylaxis. Actual TMP-SMX dose and duration, adverse effects, number of dose reductions and reasons, and PcP events were captured. Multivariate logistic regression analyses for risk factors associated with dose reduction were performed. RESULTS: Of 438 KTR, 233 (53%) maintained daily TMP-SMX and 205 (47%) sustained ≥1 dose reduction, with the point prevalence of a reduced dose regimen being between 18 and 25%. Median duration for daily TMP-SMX was 8.45/12 months, contributing 4137 patient-months daily TMP-SMX and 1110 patient-months with a reduced dose. PcP did not occur in any patients. There were 84 documented dose reductions for hyperkalemia and 102 for leukopenia, with 12 and 7 patients requiring TMP-SMX cessation. In multivariate analysis, a living donor transplant protected against hyperkalemia (Odds Ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.26-0.83, p < 0.01) while acute rejection risked leukopenia (Odds Ratio 3.31, 95% CI 1.39-7.90, p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: TMP-SMX dose reduction is frequent in the first post-transplant year but PcP does not occur. To limit the need for TMP-SMX dose reduction due to adverse effects, a clinical trial comparing daily to thrice weekly single strength TMP-SMX in de-novo KTR is justified.
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 | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".