High incidence of clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection in CMV D+/R+ lung transplant recipients receiving 3 months of antiviral prophylaxis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Universal antiviral prophylaxis is the preferred preventive strategy for lung transplant recipients (LTRs) at risk of CMV infection. We compared the risk of CMV infection between CMV D+/R + and D-/R + LTRs after 3 months of prophylaxis. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of CMV R + LTRs transplanted between 2005 and 2013. Patients dying before completing 3 months, or receiving >180 days of prophylaxis were excluded. The primary outcome was proportion of LTRs who developed CMV infection and clinically significant CMV infection defined as CMV infection leading to preemptive therapy or CMV disease. RESULTS: We analyzed 90 D+/R + and 72 D-/R + with a median follow up of 730 days. CMV infection and disease was more common in D+/R + compared to D-/R+ (CMV infection 66% vs 40%; P = 0.001; CMV disease 13% vs 4% P = 0.045). Fifty-nine patients developed at least one episode of clinically significant CMV infection (41/90 [46%] D+/R + and 18/72 [25%] D-/R + P=0.007) with recurrence occurring in 29 LTRs (49% of patients with previous CMV infection), of which 22 (76%) were CMV D+/R+. Thirty percent had side effects related to CMV therapy. CONCLUSION: Three months prophylaxis in D+/R + LTRs was associated with high rates of clinically significant CMV infection and recurrences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".