Effectiveness and safety evaluation of thrice weekly double strength vs daily single strength trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for prophylaxis of pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia after kidney transplantation: a two year prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is hard for clinicians to choose the best regimen for pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) prophylaxis. The aim is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of thrice weekly double strength (TWDS) vs daily single strength (DSS) trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) for prophylaxis of PJP after kidney transplantation. METHODS: Adult renal transplant recipients (RTRs) who were transplanted between January 1, 2015 and July 1, 2018 were evaluated. A total of 189 RTRs were prescribed PJP prophylactic regimen during the study period (TWDS group: n=98; DSS group: n=91). RESULTS: Morbidity due to PJP infection was significantly higher in TWDS group as compared with DSS group (8.60% vs 1.14%, p= 0.021). There was a significant trend toward higher prevalence of confirmed PJP (log-rank=0.021) in TWDS group. The use of DDS TMP-SMX for prophylaxis after kidney transplantation was associated with a 79% reduction in the incidence of PJP comparing the prophylactic regimen of TWDS. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the overall rate of premature TMP-SMX discontinuation and laboratory indexes. CONCLUSION: Six months of DSS TMP-SMX prophylaxis was more effective than TWDS TMP-SMX regimen with the same safety profile.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".