Management of bleeding disorders: basic science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development of factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors is the most severe and challenging complication of haemophilia A treatment and represents the highest economic burden for a chronic disease. Therefore, major research efforts are ongoing to optimize the therapeutic approaches able to minimize this complication. FVIII inhibitors have variable immuno-reactivity against different FVIII concentrates and generally have a lower reactivity against von Willebrand factor (VWF)-containing FVIII concentrates than plasma-derived FVIII (pdFVIII) or recombinant FVIII (rFVIII) that are devoid of VWF, in particular when the inhibitors are directed against the light chain of FVIII. This paper provides an overview of several in vitro and in vivo studies that compared three clinically available clinical FVIII products (Kogenate®, Bayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany; Advate®, Baxter Healthcare, Zurich, Switzerland; and Fanhdi®, Grifols S.A., Barcelona, Spain) in order to evaluate the functional actvity of the FVIII fractions in rFVIII that cannot bind VWF; explore the use of the thrombin generation assay (TGA) as a potential tool for optimizing the choice of FVIII concentrate for use in haemophilia A patients with inhibitors; compare the kinetics of the interactions between anti-FVIII antibodies and FVIII both in the presence/absence of VWF, using surface plasmon resonance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".