Failure to tolerate continuous subcutaneous treprostinil in pediatric pulmonary hypertension patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuous subcutaneous (SubQ) treprostinil is an effective therapy for pediatric patients diagnosed with pulmonary hypertension (PH). To date, the clinical characteristics and factors associated with failure to tolerate this therapy have not been described. The purpose was to describe patient-reported factors contributing to SubQ treprostinil intolerance in pediatric patients with PH. A retrospective descriptive study was performed at 11 participating sites in the United States and Canada for patients younger than 21 years of age diagnosed with PH who failed treatment to tolerate SubQ treprostinil between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2019. All data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Forty-one patients met the inclusion criteria. The average age at SQ treprostinil initiation, and length of treatment, was 8.6 years and 22.6 months, respectively. The average maximum dose, concentration, and rate were 95.8 ng/kg/min, 6.06 mg/mL, and 0.040 mL/h, respectively. The reasons for failure to tolerate SubQ treprostinil included intractable site pain (73.2%), frequent site changes (56.1%), severe site reactions (53.7%), infections (26.8%), and noncompliance/depression/anxiety (17.1%). Thirty-nine (95.1%) patients transitioned to a prostacyclin therapy with 23 patients transitioning to intravenous prostacyclin, 5 to inhaled prostacyclin, 5 to oral prostacyclin, and 7 to a prostacyclin receptor agonist. A subset of pediatric PH patients failed to tolerate SubQ treprostinil infusions despite advances in SubQ site maintenance and pain management strategies. Intractable site pain, frequent SubQ site changes, and severe localized skin reactions were the most common reasons for failure.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".