MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406199566 · doi:10.1681/asn.0000000595

Restrictive or Liberal Blood Transfusion in Patients with Myocardial Infarction and CKD

2025· article· en· W4406199566 on OpenAlexafffund
Jordan B. Strom, Brandon M. Herbert, Marnie Bertolet, Maria M. Brooks, Shahbaz A. Malik, Gilles Lemesle, Mina Madan, Philippe Gabríel Steg, Paul C. Hébert, Jay H. Traverse, Harvey D. White, Caroline Alsweiler, Rajesh Gupta, Luiz Eduardo Fonteles Ritt, Mark Menegus, John H. Alexander, Renato D. Lópes, Bernard Chaitman, Jeffrey L. Carson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAgence Nationale de la RechercheCanadian Association of College and University Student Services
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionBlood transfusionCardiologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key Points This Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion (MINT) trial analysis evaluated the optimal transfusion strategy for patients with CKD and anemia experiencing acute myocardial infarction. In patients with CKD, a liberal transfusion strategy overall did not demonstrate benefit over a restrictive strategy. Background CKD is associated with higher risk of myocardial infarction and anemia. Among patients with anemia and CKD who experience myocardial infarction, it remains uncertain whether a liberal red blood cell transfusion threshold strategy (hemoglobin cutoff <10 g/dl) is superior to a restrictive transfusion threshold (hemoglobin, 7–8 g/dl) strategy. Methods Among the 3504 patients enrolled in the Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion (MINT) trial with nonmissing serum creatinine, we compared baseline characteristics and 30-day and 6-month outcomes of patients without CKD ( N =1279), CKD with eGFR 30–60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ( N =999), CKD with eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ( N =802), and CKD requiring dialysis ( N =415) by assigned transfusion strategy. Results No statistically significant interactions were observed between CKD stage and assigned transfusion strategy. Among non–dialysis-dependent patients with an eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 , a restrictive transfusion strategy was associated with a higher risk of 30-day death or recurrent myocardial infarction (risk difference [RD], 5.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4% to 11.2%) compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. Among patients with an eGFR 30–60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 , a restrictive strategy was associated with a similar risk of 30-day death or recurrent myocardial infarction (RD, 3.7%; 95% CI, −0.9% to 8.2%) compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. Among patients with CKD requiring dialysis, a restrictive strategy was also associated with a similar risk of 30-day death or recurrent myocardial infarction (RD, −2.6%; 95% CI, −10.0% to 4.8%) compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. Conclusions In patients with CKD included in this MINT subgroup analysis, a liberal transfusion strategy was not worse than a restrictive transfusion strategy and was associated with less harm in subgroups not receiving dialysis. Clinical Trial registry name and registration number: Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion (MINT), NCT02981407.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicBlood transfusion and managementFrench-language works237,207