MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4307979500 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2190038/v1

Red cell transfusion thresholds in outpatients with myelodysplastic syndromes: results of a pilot randomised trial RBC-ENHANCE and a combined analyses with REDDS

2022· preprint· en· W4307979500 on OpenAlexafffund
Rena Buckstein, Jeannie Callum, Anca Prica, David Bowen, Richard Wells, Brian Leber, Nancy M. Heddle, Lisa Chodirker, Matthew C. Cheung, Lee Mozessohn, Karen Yee, Jennifer Gallagher, Anne Parmentier, Erin Jamula, Zoe McQuilten, Erica Wood, Liying Zhang, Alexandre Mamedov, Simon Stanworth, Yulia Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreKingston Health Sciences CentreHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteAustralian and New Zealand Society of Blood TransfusionMinistry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of IndiaNHS Blood and Transplant
KeywordsMyelodysplastic syndromesMedicineRed CellRandomized controlled trialPilot trialBlood transfusionIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The optimal hemoglobin (HgB) threshold for red blood cell transfusions in adult patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) has not been defined. We conducted a randomized multi-center study of two transfusion algorithms (liberal, to maintain Hgb 110-120 g/L, versus restrictive, 85-105 g/L) and combined our findings from RBC-ENHANCE with those of REDDS a previously published study of similar design. Primary objectives were measures of compliance to transfusion thresholds and the achievement of a 15 g/L difference in pre-transfusion Hgb. Secondary outcomes included measures of QOL, iron studies and safety. 66 patients were randomized between February 2015-2020, 33 to each arm in 15 international participating sites. The compliance was 58% and 81% in the restrictive and liberal arms respectively and the mean pre-transfusion Hgb thresholds for restrictive and liberal arms were 85.9 (SD 9) and 98.8 g/L (SD 9). Patients in the liberal arms experienced a mean of 3.4 (SD 2.6) more transfusion visits and received a mean of 5.3 (SD 5.5) extra units of blood during the 12-week study. Selected QOL scores were superior pre-transfusion and more patients achieved clinically important differences in the liberal arm. Further data are needed to establish the feasibility of liberal transfusion policies in MDS outpatients. Trial Registration: REDDS: ISRCTN26088319 RBC-ENHANCE: NCT 02099669

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→