MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy of eculizumab discontinuation in atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4413114116 on OpenAlexaff
Amy Hockman, Sydney Anuskiewicz, Emily Brennan, Saifur Rahman Chowdhury, Alexander Coltoff, Jacqueline N. Poston, Charles S. Greenberg, Benjamin Djulbegović

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Advances · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicComplement system in diseases
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtypical hemolytic uremic syndromeEculizumabDiscontinuationOdds ratioMeta-analysisInternal medicineCohortSubgroup analysisCohort studyHazard ratioConfidence intervalImmunologyIntensive care medicinePediatricsComplement systemAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS), a life-threatening complement-mediated disorder, is now treatable with terminal complement inhibitors like eculizumab. Although effective, these therapies are costly, and increase susceptibility to infections, notably meningococcal disease, raising concerns about long-term use. The optimal duration of complement inhibition remains unclear, prompting efforts to explore the possibility of treatment discontinuation. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the benefits and risks of stopping terminal complement inhibitor therapy in aHUS. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL for studies of continuing vs stopping anticomplement treatment in aHUS. Of 3303 identified studies, 13 observational studies (3 case control and 10 cohort) comprising 584 patients were included. Overall, continuing treatment was associated with an ∼76% reduction in the odds of relapse (odds ratio [OR], 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09-0.62; P = .01). Study design influenced results: cohort studies showed a more modest effect (OR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.15-1.09]), whereas case-control studies reported inflated estimates (OR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02-0.08; subgroup interaction P = .03). When the analysis was restricted to cohort studies, the effects became uncertain (statistically nonsignificant with large CIs, indicating the possibility that outcomes with continued treatment could be either superior or inferior to those observed after treatment withdrawal, or that there may be no true difference in relapse rates between the 2 therapies). Although current evidence is insufficient to provide personalized guidance on which patients with aHUS can safely discontinue anticomplement therapy, findings from higher-quality studies, which show no statistical difference between continued and discontinued treatment, suggest that discontinuation may be possible for at least some patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood AdvancesSame topicComplement system in diseasesFrench-language works237,207