MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967214137 · doi:10.1172/jci40259

Engaging the lysosomal compartment to combat B cell malignancies

2009· letter· en· W1967214137 on OpenAlexaff
Kirsten Grønbæk, Marja Jäättelä

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Investigation · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsResponse Biomedical (Canada)
FundersMedical Research CouncilNovo NordiskH. Lundbeck A/SLundbeckfondenSundhed og Sygdom, Det Frie ForskningsrådDanmarks GrundforskningsfondNational Research FoundationEuropean CommissionNovo Nordisk FondenKræftens Bekæmpelse
KeywordsCD20RituximabB cellProgrammed cell deathLymphomaMedicineImmunologyLysosomeMonoclonal antibodyCancer researchApoptosisAntibodyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The combination of rituximab, a type I anti-CD20 mAb, with conventional chemotherapy has significantly improved the outcome of patients with B cell malignancies. Regardless of this success, many patients still relapse with therapy-resistant disease, highlighting the need for the development of mAbs with higher capacity to induce programmed cell death. The so-called type II anti-CD20 mAbs (e.g., tositumomab) that trigger caspase-independent B cell lymphoma cell death in vitro and show superior efficacy as compared with rituximab in eradicating target cells in mouse models are emerging as the next generation of therapeutic anti-CD20 mAbs. In this issue of the JCI, Ivanov and colleagues identify the lysosomal compartment as a target for type II mAbs (see the related article beginning on page 2143). These data encourage the further clinical development of type II mAbs as well as other lysosome-targeting drugs in the treatment of B cell malignancies.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0090.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207