Impact of imatinib treatment on renal function in chronic myeloid leukaemia patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently, multiple epidemiological studies have linked imatinib with the alteration of renal function in chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) patients. This meta-analysis aimed to summarize the impact of imatinib use on renal function in CML patients. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on MEDLINE and Embase to identify articles assessing the impact of imatinib exposure on renal function in CML patients. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Two authors independently performed literature-screening, risk of bias and data extraction. The risk of renal dysfunction (chronic kidney disease or acute kidney injury) among imatinib users was computed as the primary outcome of interest. The certainty of findings was assessed using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) criteria. RESULTS: A total of nine articles qualified for inclusion in the systematic review, of which four articles were eligible for meta-analysis. Based on the scoring on NOS, majority of the included studies were found to be of moderate risk of bias. Majority of the studies (n = 6) reported significantly (p < .05) decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) after imatinib treatment. The risk of developing renal dysfunction (chronic kidney disease or acute kidney injury) was found to be significantly higher in imatinib users as compared to other tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) users with a pooled relative risk of 2.70 (95% CI: 1.49-4.91). Sensitivity analysis also revealed a consistently high risk of renal dysfunction with imatinib use. GRADE criteria revealed low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis found an increased risk of renal dysfunction in imatinib users compared to other TKI users.
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 | 0.012 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".