MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053775344 · doi:10.1517/14712598.7.11.1731

Review of hepatitis B surface antigen-1018 ISS adjuvant-containing vaccine safety and efficacy

2007· review· en· W2053775344 on OpenAlexaff
Mazin Barry, Curtis Cooper

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Biological Therapy · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis B Virus Studies
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdjuvantCpG OligodeoxynucleotideHepatitis B virusVaccinationImmunologyVirologyAntigenImmune systemHepatitis BTiterAntibody titerAntibodyVirusBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccines produce seroprotective titers in > 90% of healthy adult recipients following 3 doses administered over 6 months. The durability of this response is variable. Vaccine efficacy is greatly diminished in immune compromised patients. Given the high worldwide prevalence and burden of disease produced by chronic HBV infection, vaccines capable of producing high rates of durable seroprotective HBV surface antibody titers are required. Immunostimulatory sequences (ISS) containing repeating sequences of cytosine phosphoguanosine (CpG) dinucleotide motifs have emerged as useful tools for modulating immune responses. Dynavax Technologies produced a synthetic oligodexynucleotide (ODN) containing these motifs, resulting in an unmethylated cytosine and phosphoguanosine ODN called 1018 ISS. Dynavax's hepatitis B virus vaccine HEPLISAV is comprised of 1018 ISS mixed with recombinant hepatitis B surface antigen. Clinical trials, to date, have shown that HEPLISAV produces rapid, high titer, sustained seroprotection in healthy adults and vaccine hyporesponsive populations. Although additional supporting data are required, this represents a promising strategy to facilitate worldwide HBV prevention efforts.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.182
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations92
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Biological TherapySame topicHepatitis B Virus StudiesFrench-language works237,207