MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403834521 · doi:10.1681/asn.2024bpkp836s

Central vs. Peripheral Access Samplings in Patients on Hemodialysis Induce Variations in Parathyroid Hormone Levels

2024· article· en· W4403834521 on OpenAlexaffabout
S S Schreiber, Simon Desmeules, Mohsen Agharazii, Pierre Douville, Fabrice Mac‐Way

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological and metabolic disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParathyroid hormoneHemodialysisPeripheralMedicineInternal medicineHormoneUrologyEndocrinologyCalcium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels are routinely measured in dialysis patients, but international guidelines do not specify the optimal site from which PTH should be drawn. Previous findings suggest that centrally drawn PTH may significantly vary from peripherally sampled PTH1. This study aimed to compare PTH levels drawn from central venous catheters (C-PTH), peripheral veins (P-PTH) and arteriovenous fistula (AVF-PTH) in hemodialysis patients. Methods: C-PTH, P-PTH and/or AVF-PTH were simultaneously measured in hemodialysis patients at the CHU de Québec (cohort A) and CISSS Chaudières-Appalaches (cohort B) in Canada from January 1st to February 28th, 2024. Architect Intact PTHTM (Abbott, normal range 25 to 115 ng/L) was used in cohort A and IMMULITE Intact PTHTM (Siemens, normal range 20 to 100 ng/L) in cohort B. Demographic data were collected and mineral biochemistry were measured according to local standard. PTH levels were classified as “on target” according to sampling site if they were between two and nine times the upper limit of normal. Results: Cohort A included 69 hemodialysis patients (mean age 69 ± 13 years, dialysis vintage 69 ± 13 months, 86% with a central venous catheter). Mean C-PTH, P-PTH and AVF-PTH were respectively 546 ± 309 ng/L, 409 ± 227 ng/L and 533 ± 325 ng/L. Classification of PTH levels being “on target” were different between C-PTH and P-PTH in 29% of patients. Cohort B included 50 hemodialysis patients (mean age 67 ± 13 years, dialysis vintage 50 ± 60 months, 54% with a central venous catheter). Mean C-PTH, P-PTH and AVF-PTH were respectively 357 ± 264 ng/L, 352 ± 236 ng/L and 475 ± 255 ng/L. Similarly to cohort A, “on target” PTH levels were different between C-PTH and P-PTH in 18.3% of patients. Conclusion: Our results suggest that sites of sampling may influence PTH levels and could impact the treatment of hyperparathyroidism in hemodialysis patient. Standardization of sampling site should therefore be recommended. 1-Vulpio C, et al. Influence of blood sampling site on intact parathyroid hormone concentrations in hemodialysis patients. Clin Chem. 2010;56(3):489-90. 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicNeurological and metabolic disordersFrench-language works237,207