MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004952421 · doi:10.1002/rth2.12305

Pharmacokinetic‐tailored approach to hemophilia prophylaxis: Medical decision making and outcomes

2020· article· en· W3004952421 on OpenAlexaff
Stacy E. Croteau, Allison P. Wheeler, Osman Khan, Kristina M. Haley, Alexandra J. Borst, Susan Lattimore, Cindy H. T. Yeung, Alfonso Iorio

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersSpark TherapeuticsGenentechGrifolsSwedish Orphan BiovitrumCSL BehringNovo NordiskSanofiPfizer
KeywordsMedicinePopulationIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Clinical application of population pharmacokinetics (popPK) is of increasing interest to patients with hemophilia, providers, and payers. Routine use of popPK profiles in factor replacement prophylaxis decision making has the potential to maintain or improve efficacy and reduce product consumption. AIM: To investigate the feasibility of implementation and longitudinal assessment of pharmacokinetic (PK)-tailored prophylaxis in routine clinical practice for hemophilia A and to describe factors that influence decision making for prescribed hemophilia prophylaxis. METHODS: This longitudinal, multicenter, prospective feasibility study of children and adults with hemophilia A without inhibitors used the Web Accessible Population Pharmacokinetic Service-Hemophilia (WAPPS-Hemo) to generate PK profiles. Assessments over 12 weeks captured data on prescribed prophylaxis, popPK tool use, provider decision making, and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Eighteen participants aged 6 to 39 years enrolled; half used extended half-life concentrates. Patient interest in their PK centered on general curiosity followed by a desire for participation in physical activity and decrease in infusion frequency. Providers used the WAPPS clinical calculator feature to simulate prophylaxis regimens under different dose, infusion, and trough conditions. Most targeted troughs were 1 to 3 IU/dL. The feasibility assessment demonstrated challenges with patient recruitment; however, the majority of participants successfully completed study assessments meeting feasibility targets. CONCLUSION: A larger-scale study powered to evaluate the impact of PK-tailored prophylaxis on clinical and patient-reported outcomes is feasible with study design modifications to support increased recruitment rate. Shared decision making incorporating patient and provider goals is important and facilitated by regimen simulations with the clinical calculator.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch and Practice in Thrombosis and HaemostasisSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207