Epidemiology of candidemia in lung transplant recipients and risk factors for candidemia in the early posttransplant period in the absence of universal antifungal prophylaxis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lung transplant recipients are at increased risk of candidemia, especially in the early posttransplant period. However, the specific predisposing factors have not been established. The natural history of candidemia after lung transplantation, in the absence of universal antifungal prophylaxis, is not known. METHODS: We retrospectively examined the epidemiology of candidemia at any time posttransplant in patients who underwent lung transplantation at our center between 2016 and 2019. We undertook a case-control study and used logistic regression to evaluate the risk factors for candidemia during the first 30 days posttransplantation. RESULTS: During the study period 712 lung transplants were performed on 705 patients. Twenty-five lung transplant recipients (LTRs) (3.5%) experienced 31 episodes of candidemia. The median time to candidemia was 19.5 days (IQR 10.5-70.5), with 61.2% (n = 19) episodes of candidemia occurring within the first 30 days posttransplantation. Pretransplant hospitalization, posttransplant ECMO, and posttransplant renal replacement therapy were associated with an increased risk of candidemia in the first 30 days posttransplant. Of those with candidemia in the first 30 days, 31.2% died within 30 days of the index positive blood culture. Candidemia was associated with decreased survival within 30 days posttransplant. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the greatest risk period of lung transplant recipients for development of candidemia and identifies several factors associated with increased risk of candidemia. These findings will help guide future studies on antifungal prophylaxis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".