MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407158622 · doi:10.1016/j.trim.2025.102178

Determining the best premedication regimen to prevent rabbit anti-human thymocyte globulin infusion-associated reactions: A retrospective study comparing two hematopoietic stem cell transplant centers

2025· article· en· W4407158622 on OpenAlexafffund
Keven Vachon, Marc-Antoine Tardif, Étienne Paillé, Marie-Hélène Leblanc, Guy Cantin, Christopher Lemieux, Geneviève Gallagher

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplant Immunology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiUniversité LavalCégep de RimouskiCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
FundersFondation CHU de Québec
KeywordsAnti-thymocyte globulinPremedicationRegimenHaematopoiesisHematopoietic stem cellRetrospective cohort studyBiologyStem cellHematopoietic stem cell transplantationMedicineAndrologyInternal medicineImmunologyGlobulinAnesthesiaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Thymoglobulin® (ATG), a rabbit anti-human thymocyte globulin, is used in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) mainly to prevent the development of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Three doses (ATG1, ATG2, and ATG3) are administered on separate days, apart from the graft day. Since infusion-associated reactions (IAR) are frequent, patients were treated with acetaminophen, antihistamine, and corticosteroids (CS) as premedication (PR); however, the best PR regimen remains to be defined. METHODS: The study compared the incidence and severity of IAR related to ATG according to the different PR therapy. This descriptive retrospective cohort study included patients receiving ATG in two HSCT transplant centers (Hospitals A and B). The data cut-off was in March 2020, but the period of interest was different between the two hospitals to balance the two groups. Four PR regimens were compared, one from Hospital A (PR-A) and three from Hospital B (PR-B1, B2, and B3), which have changed twice in the last decade. Along with PR therapy, the indication and method of administration of ATG also differed between hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients were included from May 2011 to March 2020. Groups PR-A, B1, B2, and B3 had, respectively, 61, 22, 26, and 23 patients. Of them, 115 (87 %) had at least one IAR, and 86 (65 %) had at least one severe IAR during any ATG infusions. ATG3 had the lowest incidence of IAR (39 %), and it seemed better tolerated when given after graft infusion than before (32 % vs. 46 %, respectively; p = 0.11). Almost three-quarters of patients had at least one IAR that occurred after the end of an ATG infusion, but there was less IAR with PR-B3 protocol where acetaminophen and diphenhydramine were regularly administered beyond ATG infusion. Hospital A used a progressive rate of infusion, but early IAR was seen compared to Hospital B (p = 0.03), where a fixed rate was used. No direct association was found between the CS dose received and IAR incidence (p = 0.21) or severity (p = 0.61). However, there was a recurrent signal for less severe IAR in the PR-B3 group compared to its predecessors, B1 and B2 groups (p = 0.12), and the key difference was an increased CS dose. The mean total CS therapy received was nearly double at Hospital A compared with Hospital B (1182 vs. 692 mg prednisone equivalent; p < 0.01). Fungal infection rate was higher in Hospital A compared to Hospital B (33 % vs. 13 %; p < 0.01). The infection rate correlated with a higher dose of CS received on days of ATG therapy (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: ATG3 given the day after HSCT appears to play a key role in reducing the incidence and severity of IAR. Infusion over six hours at a fixed rate was safe. Frequent, regular, and extended doses of acetaminophen and antihistamines beyond ATG infusion appear useful. Increasing CS doses led to IAR reduction, but this correlated with an increased infection rate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplant ImmunologySame topicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationFrench-language works237,207