MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of oral doxycycline for epistaxis in hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia

2022· other· en· W6940222470 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelangiectasiaDoxycyclineCrossover studySignificant differenceBlood transfusionHemoglobin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Vascular malformations in hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) lead to chronic recurrent bleeding, hemorrhage, stroke, heart failure, and liver disease. There is great interest in identifying novel therapies for epistaxis in HHT given its associated morbidity and impact on quality of life. We aimed to measure the effectiveness of oral doxycycline for the treatment of epistaxis and explore mechanisms of action on angiogenic, inflammatory and pathway markers in HHT using a randomized controlled trial. Methods 13 HHT patients with epistaxis were recruited from the Toronto HHT Center at St. Michael’s Hospital. Recruitment was stopped early due to COVID-19-related limitations. The study duration was 24 months. Patients were randomly assigned to the treatment-first or placebo-first study arm. We compared the change in weekly epistaxis duration and frequency, biomarkers, blood measurements, and intravenous iron infusion and blood transfusion requirements between treatment and placebo. Results There was no significant difference in the change in weekly epistaxis duration (p = 0.136) or frequency (p = 0.261) between treatment and placebo. There was no significant difference in the levels of MMP-9, VEGF, ANG-2, IL-6 or ENG with treatment. Hemoglobin levels were significantly higher (p = 0.0499) during treatment. Ferritin levels were not significantly different between treatment and placebo. There was no significant difference in RBC transfusions between treatment periods (p = 0.299). Conclusion Overall, our study did not demonstrate effectiveness of doxycycline as a treatment for epistaxis in patients with HHT, though the study was underpowered. Secondary analyses provided new observations which may help guide future trials in HHT. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03397004. Registered 11 January 2018 – Prospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03397004

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→