Inhibitors – genetic and environmental factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is known that a large number of both genetic and environmental factors contribute to the risk of inhibitor development, but underlying pathogenetic mechanisms are still under investigation. The clinical research on inhibitors towards factor VIII (FVIII) is challenged by the fact that this is an infrequent event occurring in a rare disease. Therefore, it is widely accepted that complementary studies involving animal models can provide important insights into the pathogenesis and treatment of this complication. In this respect, mouse models have been studied for clues to FVIII immunogenicity, natural history of immunity and for different approaches to primary and secondary tolerance induction. In the clinical setting, the type of FVIII product used and the occurrence of product switching are considered important factors which may have an influence on inhibitor development. The evaluation of data currently available in the literature does not prove unequivocally that a difference in the immunogenicity exists between particular FVIII products (e.g. recombinant vs. plasma-derived, full length vs. B-domainless). In addition, national products switches have occurred and, in this context, switching was not associated with an enhanced inhibitor risk. In contrast with severe haemophilia A, patients with moderate and mild haemophilia A receive FVIII treatment infrequently for bleeds or surgery. In this condition the inhibitor risk is low but remains present lifelong, requiring continuous vigilance, particularly after intensive FVIII exposure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".