Predictors of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Oman
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to estimate the prevalence and evaluate risk factors of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to platinum-based compounds (PBCs) in cancer patients. PBCs play an important role in cancer therapy. However, one of the drawbacks of PBCs is the occasional occurrence of HSRs, which can lead to serious consequences. Methods: This retrospective case control study was conducted from January 2013 to December 2020 at Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Muscat, Oman and included patients who received any PBC for the management of non-haematological cancers. Data regarding demographic characteristics and diseases and treatment details were collected from the hospital's electronic database. The data were quantitatively described and Student's t-test and Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney tests were used to detect significant differences. Results: <0.001) were significant predictors of HSRs to PBCs. The majority of the reactions were of mild to moderate severity, and the rechallenge rate after HSR development was 13%. Conclusion: HSRs to PBCs impact therapy decisions and understanding the risk factors is important to improve treatment outcomes in cancer patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".