MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200598935 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofab466.192

192. Tolerability Outcomes of Multi-drug Antibiotic Treatment for Pulmonary Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Disease due to <i>Mycobacterium avium</i> Complex in U.S. Medicare Beneficiaries with Bronchiectasis

2021· article· en· W4200598935 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer H Ku, Emily Henkle, Kathleen F. Carlson, Miguel Marino, Sarah K. Brode, Theodore K. Marras, Kevin Winthrop

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMycobacterium research and diagnosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthambutolRifabutinMedicineAzithromycinTolerabilityClarithromycinInternal medicineRegimenDiscontinuationRifamycinBronchiectasisAntibacterial agentAntibioticsTuberculosisAdverse effectRifampicinMicrobiologyLungPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM), most frequently Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC), cause increasingly common pulmonary infections. Treatment interruptions and early discontinuation are common in MAC therapy, but population-based data on treatment outcomes are severely lacking. We examined tolerability outcomes of guideline-based 3-drug therapies (GBT) targeted for pulmonary MAC infection. Methods Among beneficiaries with bronchiectasis (ICD-9-CM 494.0 or 494.1) in U.S. Medicare data (01/2006 – 12/2014), we identified first-time MAC GBT therapy users, excluding those with cystic fibrosis, HIV, or a history of organ transplant. MAC GBT was defined as an overlapping prescription of ≥ 28-day supply of a macrolide, ethambutol and rifamycin. Using Cox regression methods, we compared time-to-regimen change or discontinuation within 12 months of therapy start in the following groups: 1) azithromycin-ethambutol-rifamycin vs. clarithromycin-ethambutol-rifamycin; 2) macrolide-ethambutol-rifampin vs. macrolide-ethambutol-rifabutin; and 3) azithromycin-ethambutol-rifampin vs. clarithromycin-ethambutol-rifabutin. Results We identified 4,626 GBT therapy users (mean 77.9 years [s.d. 6.1], female [77.7%], and non-Hispanic white [87.2%]). Overall, the rate of regimen change or discontinuation was higher in the clarithromycin-based regimens compared to azithromycin-containing regimens, and in rifabutin-containing regimens compared to rifampin-containing regimens. The rate of drug regimen change or discontinuation was 65% greater in the clarithromycin-ethambutol-rifabutin group compared to the azithromycin-ethambutol-rifampin group (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.43, 1.64) (Table 1, Figure 1). Conclusion Azithromycin-based regimens and rifampin-containing regimens were less likely to be changed or discontinued within 12 months of therapy compared to clarithromycin-based regimens and rifabutin-containing regimens, respectively. More research is needed to identify factors associated with early treatment change or discontinuation. Disclosures Emily Henkle, PhD, MPH, AN2 (Consultant, Advisor or Review Panel member)Zambon (Advisor or Review Panel member) Theodore K. Marras, MD, Astra Zeneca (Speaker’s Bureau)Insmed (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Novartis (Speaker’s Bureau)RedHill (Consultant)Spero (Consultant) Kevin L. Winthrop, MD, MPH, Insmed (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Paratek (Consultant)RedHill (Consultant)Spero (Consultant) Kevin L. Winthrop, MD, MPH, Insmed (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Paratek (Consultant)RedHill Biopharma (Consultant)Spero (Consultant)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicMycobacterium research and diagnosisFrench-language works237,207