MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200288761 · doi:10.1055/s-0041-1740561

Conservative Management of Presumed Fetal Anemia Secondary to Maternal Chemotherapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia

2021· article· en· W4200288761 on OpenAlexaff
Christina Nowik, Alina S. Gerrie, Jonathan Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Perinatology Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCytarabineFetusAnemiaChemotherapyHydrops fetalisPregnancyPediatricsSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute myeloid leukemia occurs rarely during pregnancy. When it is diagnosed remote from term, treatment in the form of daunorubicin plus cytarabine induction with consolidative cytarabine is typically undertaken after the first trimester. There is little data to guide fetal monitoring, in particular, whether and how often middle cerebral artery peak systolic velocity (MCA PSV) should be measured to screen for fetal anemia. Cytarabine may be particularly myelosuppressive to the fetus, but information pertaining to the management of this complication is also lacking in published literature. To our knowledge, we present the first case of presumed severe fetal anemia related to in utero exposure to chemotherapy that was managed conservatively with close sonographic monitoring, including serial measurement of MCA PSV. This case suggests that in the absence of hydrops fetalis or other signs of fetal decompensation, expectant management with ultrasound twice weekly, including MCA PSV, is appropriate. Ultrasounds may be decreased to weekly when MCA PSV does not suggest fetal anemia. Screening for fetal anemia can provide helpful information to guide the timing of chemotherapy administration and delivery. Key Points

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Perinatology ReportsSame topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207