MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403811924 · doi:10.1681/asn.2024354jagz6

Late Kidney and Blood Pressure Outcomes after Pediatric Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplant: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2024· review· en· W4403811924 on OpenAlexaff
Carolyn Sun, Sahrish Masood, Jenan-Jill Kiyingi, Sharaniza Ab‐Rahim, Tal Schechter, Victor Lui, Stella Wang, Michael Zappitelli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicineHematopoietic stem cellStem cellHaematopoiesisKidney transplantHematopoietic stem cell transplantationIntensive care medicineKidneyInternal medicineBlood pressureKidney transplantationOncologyTransplantationBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients are at risk for late kidney and blood pressure (BP) outcomes, but existing literature on their prevalence is unclear and outcome assessments differ widely. We evaluated 1) the proportion of patients with late kidney and BP outcomes after pediatric HSCT; 2) the proportion of studies that assess AKI in the first 100-days post-HSCT; 3) kidney and BP outcome definition methods reported. Methods: Searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus (January 2000–November 2022) for observational studies or clinical trials reporting kidney or BP outcomes, ≥6 months post-pediatric HSCT (excluded: N<20; conference abstracts; non-English/French). Categorical (e.g., CKD) and continuous (e.g., GFR) outcome measures were collected. Two reviewers independently reviewed articles, extracted data, and evaluated study quality; a third reviewer resolved disagreements. Stratified meta-analyses of pooled proportions were performed by HSCT indication (malignancy; non-malignancy; both) using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed; multiple sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: 12,333 references identified, 45 selected: 36/45(80.0%) and 20/45(44.4%) evaluated late kidney and BP outcomes, respectively; 18/45(40.0%) assessed AKI. Pooled proportions of patients with late kidney and BP outcomes: 15.0% [95% CI 0.11–0.20, I2=87.2%] and 9.0% [95% CI 0.06–0.13, I2=92.2%], respectively. Sensitivity analyses (removing different studies) showed similar estimates. Highest proportions were observed for the malignancy HSCT indication. There was significant heterogeneity in pooled estimates (all, p<0.05). GFR, albuminuria, and proteinuria were used to assess kidney function in 26(72.2%), 4(11.1%) and 4(11.1%) studies, respectively. Definitions for late kidney and BP outcomes were at times undefined and varied greatly. Conclusion: Late kidney and BP outcomes are common after pediatric HSCT, especially in malignancies, but the literature is exceedingly difficult to interpret. Future research should use well-defined kidney and BP outcome definitions with a goal to study data-driven interventions to reduce long-term kidney health burden. Funding: Government Support – Non-U.S.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.036
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→