Safety and efficacy of anticoagulant therapy in pediatric catheter-related venous thrombosis (EINSTEIN-Jr CVC-VTE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anticoagulant treatment of pediatric central venous catheter-related venous thromboembolism (CVC-VTE) has not been specifically evaluated. In EINSTEIN-Jr, 500 children with any VTE received rivaroxaban or standard anticoagulants. A predefined analysis of the CVC-VTE cohort was performed. Children with CVC-VTE (age, birth to 17 years) were administered rivaroxaban or standard anticoagulants during the 1-month (children <2 years) or 3-month (all other children) study period. Predefined outcomes were recurrent VTE, change in thrombotic burden on repeat imaging, and bleeding. Predictors for continuation of anticoagulant therapy beyond the study period were evaluated. One hundred twenty-six children with symptomatic (n = 76, 60%) or asymptomatic (n = 50, 40%) CVC-VTE received either rivaroxaban (n = 90) or standard anticoagulants (n = 36). There was no recurrent VTE (0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.0%-2.8%). Three children had the principal safety outcome: none had major bleeding and 3 children had clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (2.4%; 95% CI, 0.7%-6.5%), all in the rivaroxaban arm. Complete or partial vein recanalization occurred in 57 (55%) and 38 (37%) of 103 evaluable children, respectively. Results were similar for symptomatic and asymptomatic CVC-VTE. Continuation of anticoagulant therapy beyond the study period occurred in 61 (48%) of children and was associated with residual VTE but only in children <2 years (odds ratio [OR], 20.9; P = .003) and continued CVC use (OR, 6.7; P = .002). Anticoagulant therapy appeared safe and efficacious and was associated with reduced clot burden in most children with symptomatic or asymptomatic CVC-VTE. Residual VTE and continued CVC use were associated with extended anticoagulation. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02234843.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".