Initial evaluation of extracorporeal immunomodulatory therapy for the treatment of critically ill COVID-19 infected patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Severe COVID-19 infection results in significant immune dysregulation resulting from excessive recruitment and activation of neutrophils. The aim of this study was to confirm feasibility, initial safety and detect signal of efficacy of a non-propriety device delivered using an intermittent extra-corporeal system (LMOD) allowing leucocytes modulation in the setting of Severe COVID-19 infection. Twelve patients were recruited. Inclusion criteria were > 18 years age, confirmed COVID-19, acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical support and hypotension requiring vasopressor support. Primary end point was vasopressor requirements (expressed as epinephrine dose equivalents) and principle secondary endpoints related to safety, ability to deliver the therapy and markers of inflammation assessed over five days after treatment initiation. LMOD treatment appeared safe, defined by hemodynamic stability and no evidence of white cell number depletion from blood. We demonstrated a significant decrease in vasopressor doses (-37%, p = 0.02) in patients receiving LMOD therapy (despite these patients having to tolerate an additional extracorporeal intermittent therapy). Vasopressor requirements unchanged/increasing in control group (+ 10%, p = 0.48). Although much about the use of this therapy in the setting of severe COVID-19 infection remains to be defined (e.g. optimal dose and duration), this preliminary study supports the further evaluation of this novel extracorporeal approach.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".