MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038728857 · doi:10.2174/1381612003400623

Consideration of Cytokines as Therapeutics Agents or Targets

2000· review· en· W2038728857 on OpenAlexaff
Zhou Xing, Jun Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Pharmaceutical Design · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineComputational biologyRisk analysis (engineering)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been an explosion of our knowledge in cytokine biology in the last decade. Such knowledge is being quickly translated into the identification of etiologies and improved prophylaxis and therapy of disease. While cytokines have the potential to be used as therapeutics or immune adjuvants for certain diseases, they may also be culprits as therapeutic targets in other diseases. This review article serves as an introduction to the other five articles in this thematic issue each of which has a specific focus on the frontier of cytokine therapeutic biology. This review contains sections dealing with general cytokine properties, cytokine classifications, human conditions caused by cytokine under-expression and over-expression, Th1 and Th2 paradigm, cytokine therapy for acute/chronic inflammatory conditions, cytokine therapy for infectious diseases, and cytokine therapy for cancer. Keywords: Cytokines, Therapeutics Agnets, Prophylaxis, Th1, Th2, paradigm, therapy, Inflammatory, Infectious diseases, Recombinant, Immune, prophylactic vaccines, autoimmune, cancer, transgene, receptors, Chronic, Wound Healing, GM CSF, Fibrotic, Bronchial Asthma, Rheumatoid Arthritis

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.523
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.030 · 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
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

Citations24
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Pharmaceutical DesignSame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207