MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Anacetrapib: Hope for CETP Inhibitors?

2010· review· en· W1591229062 on OpenAlexaff
Ronen Gurfinkel, Tisha Joy

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiovascular Therapeutics · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCholesterylester transfer proteinMedicinePharmacologyLipoproteinCholesterolInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP), a key protein involved in reverse cholesterol transport, can lead to increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels and thus, is under evaluation as an antiatherogenic strategy. Several CETP inhibitors have been under development including anacetrapib, dalcetrapib, and torcetrapib. To date, anacetrapib demonstrates the greatest HDL-C raising and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering potential. Phase I and phase II trials with anacetrapib have revealed that anacetrapib is well-tolerated and does not seem to possess the pressor effects associated with torcetrapib. This article will briefly review the HDL-C raising through CETP inhibition as an antiatherogenic strategy with a specific focus on anacetrapib.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.020
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.341
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 designOther design
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

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiovascular TherapeuticsSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207