Comparison of Sodium Bicarbonate and Lactated Ringers Hydration for High-dose Methotrexate Chemotherapy in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-dose methotrexate is part of the treatment of pediatric cancers. To reduce the risk of toxicity, supportive measures, including hydration and alkalinization, are recommended. At our institution, we switched from intravenous sodium bicarbonate to Lactated Ringers during a worldwide shortage. PROCEDURE: This was a retrospective cohort of children who received high-dose methotrexate from January 1, 2016 to August 31, 2018. The primary outcome was the prevalence of delayed methotrexate clearance. Secondary outcomes were proportion of cycles with delayed methotrexate clearance, time to methotrexate clearance, adverse events, risk factors for delayed clearance, and association between hydration type and delayed clearance. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients, with a total of 325 methotrexate cycles, were included. Forty-four patients received sodium bicarbonate, 31 received Lactated Ringers, and 7 received both. There was no difference in the prevalence of delayed methotrexate clearance between those who received sodium bicarbonate and Lactated Ringers (64% vs. 68%). The proportion of cycles with delayed methotrexate clearance, time to methotrexate clearance, and adverse events were similar between groups. Cancer type, methotrexate dose, and vomiting were associated with delayed clearance. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that Lactated Ringers may be used in place of sodium bicarbonate for intravenous hydration during high-dose methotrexate.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".