Extracorporeal photopheresis for the prevention of rejection after lung transplantation: a prospective randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Lung transplant recipients have the worst long-term outcomes of all solid organs due to acute rejection and chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD). Our objective was to investigate the efficacy of extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) as a prophylactic treatment to prevent acute cellular rejection (ACR), cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections and reduce the risk of CLAD. Methods This was a single-centre prospective randomised controlled trial conducted at the Medical University of Vienna (Vienna, Austria) between 2018 and 2020. It included 31 COPD recipients per group. The treatment group underwent ECP in addition to a standard triple-drug immunosuppression protocol after lung transplantation. The control group received standard triple-drug immunosuppressive therapy. The primary outcome was a composite outcome defined as incidence of high-grade ACR, CMV infection or CLAD within 24 months after lung transplantation. Results In the control group, 19 patients (61.3%) achieved the primary combined end-point compared with only six patients (19.4%) in the treatment group (p<0.001). Freedom from high-grade ACR was significantly greater in the ECP group (p=0.045). Cumulative A scores were significantly lower in the ECP group than in the control group at 3 months (0.18±0.44 versus 0.56±0.94; p<0.05) and at 12 months (0.25±0.48 versus 1.0±1.45; p=0.002). The rate of infections was lower in the ECP group with five cases and 67 cumulative hospital days compared with 22 cases and 309 days in the control group (p=0.002). Freedom from CLAD at 3 years was significantly greater in the ECP group (p=0.015). Conclusion Adding ECP to standard triple immunosuppression resulted in a significant reduction of the number of ACR episodes and significantly lower incidence of CLAD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".