MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127692206 · doi:10.1016/s2666-6367(21)00475-9

Efficacy of Oral Ribavirin in Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Patients: A Single-Centre Experience

2021· article· en· W3127692206 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shona Philip, Adrienne Fulford, Krista Biederman, Brandon Dorland, Anargyros Xenocostas, Uday Deotare

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation and Cellular Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRibavirinMedicineHematopoietic stem cell transplantationRetrospective cohort studyInternal medicineTransplantationVirusImmunologyHepatitis C virus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is one of the most commonly encountered respiratory viruses among patients who have been diagnosed with a hematological malignancy or a hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). In immunocompromised patients including HSCT recipients, RSV can progress to a more severe lower respiratory infection (LRI), often complicated by respiratory failure leading to increased morbidity and mortality. Little is known about the best management strategy in this immunocompromised group and strategies to manage RSV is challenging. Data on aerosolized ribavirin to treat RSV infections in HSCT recipients come from small, retrospective studies with heterogeneous treatment combinations but nevertheless, have shown to prevent poor outcomes. There is very little data on oral ribavirin treatment but the retrospective data so far has been promising. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of oral ribavirin in HSCT patients with RSV infection at our centre in London, Ontario. Methods: Eighteen HSCT patients with RSV were analyzed retrospectively. In 2012, there were 5 patients treated with supportive care alone. After 2012, there were 13 patients treated with oral ribavirin. RSV diagnosis was established by polymerase chain reaction assay via nasopharyngeal swabs. Oral ribavirin was initiated at 15 mg/kg/day in three divided doses for 7-10 days with possibility of extension in persistently symptomatic patients. An immunodeficiency scoring index (ISI) was used to classify patients as low, moderate, or high risk for progression to lower respiratory infection (LRI) or death. Findings: An outbreak of RSV occurred in our oncology unit in early 2012 where 5 HSCT patients ((3 autologous HSCT and 2 allogeneic HSCT patients) contracted RSV infection as well. No definitive treatment options were available during this period and patients were managed with supportive care alone. 4/5 HSCT patients died of RSV infection leading into an 80% mortality rate. This experience led to the development of a protocol for the HSCT patients focusing on prevention of nosocomial transmission, early PCR testing and treatment with oral ribavirin for those confirmed with RSV infection and signs of pneumonia or LRI. Since 2012, 13 HSCT patients (4 autologous HSCT patients and 9 allogeneic HSCT patients) were diagnosed with RSV infection and promptly treated with oral ribavirin. The median treatment duration was 10 days (range: 7-12). All patients treated with oral ribavirin survived the infection. Oral ribavirin was well tolerated with minor adverse effects. Conclusion: We found that HSCT patients with lower respiratory RSV infections can be successfully managed by use of prevention strategies and oral ribavirin. Although, our experience reflects a small sample size, the protocol was associated with decreased mortality compared to patients who received supportive care alone. Our experience supports the use of oral ribavirin for the early treatment of HSCT patients with RSV associated LRI and may be an alternative to aerosolized RBV. But ongoing review of our experience with this protocol is necessary and large prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal therapy in this patient group. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantation and Cellular TherapySame topicRespiratory viral infections researchFrench-language works237,207