Effects of glutathione-S-transferase polymorphisms on intravenous busulfan in hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients: a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the impact of glutathione- S -transferase polymorphisms (GSTA1, GSTM1, GSTP1, and GSTT1) on the area under the curve (AUC), clearance, veno-occlusive disease (VOD), and graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients treated with intravenous busulfan. METHODS: A systematic review was performed on three electronic databases to identify relevant studies. The relative risk and the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the association of different GST polymorphisms with pharmacokinetic and clinical outcomes were reported using the random and fixed effect models. Quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. Heterogeneity between studies and publication bias were also carried out using R software. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. GSTA1*A/*B was significantly associated with lower clearance (95% CI: 0.008-1.223, P = 0.048) and higher AUC (95% CI: -374.960 to -56.661, P = 0.008) than the GSTA1*A/*A genotype. GSTA1*B/*B had a higher busulfan AUC than GSTA1*A/*A (95% CI: -403.531 to -89.454, P = 0.002). None of the other genotypes was significantly associated with busulfan pharmacokinetic parameters or the risk of VOD or GvHD. CONCLUSION: GSTA1 should be considered as a guide for intravenous busulfan dosing in allogeneic HSCT patients, where patients with the GSTA1*A/*A genotype require a higher dose than GSTA1*B carriers.
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 | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.062 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".