MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Recombinant Activated Factor VII (rFVIIa) in the Treatment of Non-Hemophilia Patients: Physician Underreporting of Thromboembolic Adverse Events.

2007· article· en· W2979867208 on OpenAlexaff
Cyrus C. Hsia, Joanna H. Zurawska, Michael Z. Tong, Kathleen Eckert, Vivian C. McAlister, Ian Chin‐Yee

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsVictoria HospitalCanadian Blood ServicesLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdverse effectRecombinant factor VIIaIntensive care medicinePediatricsEmergency medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) is a potent hemostatic agent with a short half-life of 2.6 hours and is approved for various hereditary and acquired bleeding disorders. Its “off-label” utilization has increased and is the focus of a number of ongoing clinical trials. One concern is that its beneficial hemostatic effect may be offset by the potential for thromboembolic adverse events (TAEs). Despite its short half-life, rFVIIa likely produces a sustained hemostatic effect and the potential for thromboembolic events may also be prolonged. A recent review of adverse events reported to the FDA suggested that this risk was substantial. The duration that this risk may be present is unclear. Physicians may only consider adverse events to be causally related in the immediate few hours after administration of rFVIIa leading to underreporting TAEs. We conducted a retrospective review of all off-label uses of rFVIIa comparing physician reporting of TAEs to documented TAEs on chart review. Methods: Chart review of all non-hemophilia adult patients who had received rFVIIa at our tertiary care centre was completed. Following all off-label administration, questionnaires were routinely sent to all treating physicians to report outcomes and adverse reactions with the use of rFVIIa. We included all non-hemophilia adult patients at our tertiary care centre who have received rFVIIa. Exclusion criteria were age < 18 and patients with hemophilia or other bleeding disorders for which rFVIIa use is approved. TAEs identified during chart review were compared to physician reporting on questionnaires. Results: A total of 71 patients, 32 females and 39 males, satisfied study criteria during the period January 1, 2003 to June 30, 2007. Mean age was 54 (range 18–84). This was a high-risk population with 34 (47.9%) deaths. Mean duration of follow-up was 30 days (within 1 day to 312 days). Total doses of rFVIIa administered ranged from 2.4–19.2mg (mean 8.2mg) given in 1 to 4 divided doses. 11 arterial and 5 venous TAEs identified on chart review were deemed possibly or probably related. These occurred on average 25 days (within 2 day to 89 days) after exposure to rFVIIa. In total, 50 physician questionnaires (70%) were completed. There were no TAEs reported to the transfusion safety officer at our institution by the treating physician(s) in these questionnaires. Conclusions: Clinically important thromboembolic events due to recombinant activated factor VII are under-reported in this high-risk population. This review was not designed to determine if rFVIIa alters the rate of TAEs but emphasizes the need for careful follow-up, both immediate as well as longterm, of patients who have hemorrhage or are at risk of hemorrhage. Physicians treating patients with rFVIIa should be vigilant for potential TAEs beyond the immediate treatment period.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score1.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.293 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainReporting
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicHemophilia Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→