Bleomycin for Malignant Pericardial Effusion: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Adverse Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Malignant pericardial effusion (MPE) is a progressive fluid accumulation in the pericardial space that can lead to pericardial tamponade. Despite the high recurrence rate associated with pericardiocentesis, it remains the mainstay therapy. Bleomycin has emerged as an intrapericardial sclerosing therapy that may reduce recurrence and improve patients' quality of life. This systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety profile of bleomycin instillation in patients with MPE. An exhaustive search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, EBSCO, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Eligible studies included MPE patients as participants who were treated with intrapericardial bleomycin, reporting the patients' outcomes and using English in the full text. Individual studies were assessed for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scales for cohort studies and the Jadad Scale for trial studies. Eight studies were included in this systematic review involving 242 MPE patients treated with bleomycin. Bleomycin demonstrated lower recurrence rates than other sclerosing agents, with only ≤5% of patients requiring repeated drainage because of recurrence. Bleomycin treatment resulted in 3.5 days less hospitalization compared with doxycycline. Bleomycin is also safe to use, with reported less severe pain compared with other treatment agents for MPE, such as doxycycline and pericardiocentesis. Bleomycin may benefit patients by reducing recurrence rates and improving patients' quality of life. Moreover, it is safe and has low rates of adverse events after the instillation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".