Outcomes of ciclosporin treatment in paediatric patients with drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS): a retrospective cohort analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a rare but severe hypersensitivity reaction. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the efficacy of systemic corticosteroids, the current first-line treatment, with ciclosporin, a treatment that is increasingly being used in paediatric patients with DRESS. We analysed the cases of 14 paediatric patients (aged < 18 years) admitted to the hospital between January 2016 and September 2023. Five patients received ciclosporin, while nine were treated with systemic corticosteroids. Ciclosporin treatment was associated with shorter hospital stays (median 6 days vs. 9 days) and more rapid normalization of alanine aminotransferase levels (25 days vs. 40 days) compared with corticosteroid treatment. While ciclosporin was well-tolerated, corticosteroid treatment was linked to adverse events, including corticosteroid-induced diabetes (n = 2), disease flares during tapering (n = 3) and the need for treatment intensification (n = 2). These findings suggest that ciclosporin may be a promising treatment for managing paediatric DRESS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".