MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980829446

Levetiracetam Induced Increase in Creatine Phosphokinase Levels.

2017· article· en· W2980829446 on OpenAlexaff
Naila Shahbaz, Syed Muneeb Younus, Sohaib Ahmed Khan, Qurrat Ul Ain, Mudassir Khan, Mohammad Hassan Memon

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
Canadian institutionsNational Defence Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLevetiracetamMedicineTopiramateAdverse effectAnesthesiaHyperventilationEpilepsyCreatine kinasePediatricsInternal medicinePsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Levetiracetam is an antiepileptic drug used for the treatment of generalised or partial seizures, either alone or in a combination therapy. Adverse effects have been reported with its clinical use, including headache, dizziness, liver failure etc. A rare but an important adverse effect is an increase in creatine phosphokinase (CPK) levels with its use. Herein, we present a case of 43-year male, known intravenous (IV) drug abuser with a history of decompressive craniotomy. Patient presented with severe behavioural disorder for which risperidone was given. Five days later, he started having high grade fever, hyperventilation and uncontrolled generalised tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS). After initial management of seizures, levetiracetam was started in combination with topiramate for seizure control. Seizures remained subsided but CPK levels, which were normal at the start of therapy, began to rise and reached tremendous levels of 29,000 mg/dl within a span of a week. Levetiracetam, suspected as a cause of this increase CPK levels, was stopped immediately and the levels returned to baseline within one week. This report provided us with an important step in the management of seizures with levetiracetam.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity StudiesFrench-language works237,207