MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067257961 · doi:10.1186/1710-1492-10-s1-a14

Efficacy and safety of standardized short ragweed sublingual immunotherapy tablet (SLIT-T) treatment in Canadian subjects with ragweed pollen-induced rhinitis with or without conjunctivitis

2014· article· en· W2067257961 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Michael S. Blaiss, Peter S. Creticos, Jacques Hébert, Amarjot Kaur, Harold Kim, Jennifer Maloney, Harold S. Nelson, Hendrik Nolte, Susan Waserman

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAllergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWestern UniversityInstitut de Recherche et de Développement en Agroenvironnement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRagweedAmbrosia artemisiifoliaSublingual immunotherapyMedicineSlitPlaceboAsthmaNasal administrationAmbrosiaDermatologySublingual administrationAllergyImmunologyPollenAllergenInternal medicinePathologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficacy of standardized short ragweed sublingual immunotherapy tablet (SLIT-T), MK-3641 (Merck/ALK; 12 Amb a 1-U of Ambrosia artemisiifolia ) treatment on Canadian ragweed-allergic subjects was assessed using subgroup analysis of data from 2 multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials designed to evaluate ragweed SLIT-T efficacy and safety in adults with ragweed pollen-induced allergic rhinitis with or without conjunctivitis (AR/C), with or without asthma. We conducted pooled subgroup analysis of data from 2 studies (P05234, n=784; P05233, n=565) investigating efficacy and safety of once-daily ragweed SLIT-T [ 1 , 2 ]. In both trials, subjects were randomized to receive ragweed SLIT-T (of multiple doses tested, 12 Amb a 1-U was found most effective and is included here) or placebo. Treatment was started approximately 16 weeks before ragweed pollen season (RS) and continued during and after RS (total, approximately 52 weeks). Subjects recorded AR/C symptoms in daily e-diaries from randomization to end of RS. During RS, subjects also recorded AR/C rescue medication use. The primary efficacy endpoint was the average total combined score (TCS), the sum of the daily symptom score (DSS) and daily medication score (DMS) during peak RS (the 15 consecutive days within RS with the highest 15-day moving average pollen count). In the pooled study population of the 2 trials, approximately 80% of subjects were polysensitized and approximately 20% had asthma; mean age was approximately 36 years. The pooled Canadian subpopulation included 104 and 94 subjects receiving placebo and 12 Amb a 1-U SLIT-T respectively. Average pollen count for Canadian sites was approximately 100 grains/m during peak RS. Canadian subjects receiving 12 Amb a 1-U SLIT-T had a mean TCS of 5.13 over peak RS, representing a 42% reduction vs 8.90 for placebo (–3.77; 95% CI, –5.16 to –2.39). Reductions in the primary endpoint with 12 Amb a 1-U SLIT-T were supported by reductions in components DSS and DMS in the pooled population. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported for 80.9% and 94.5% of Canadian subjects in placebo and 12 Amb a 1-U SLIT-T groups respectively; treatment-related AEs were reported for 33.9% and 80.9% respectively. The majority of treatment-related AEs were mild, local, application-site reactions with no reports of serious treatment-related AEs or systemic allergic reactions. In pooled subgroup analysis from 2 trials, ragweed SLIT-T therapy reduced symptom and medication scores in Canadian subjects with ragweed pollen-induced AR/C with or without asthma.

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)0.002
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.678
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergy Asthma and Clinical ImmunologySame topicAllergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFrench-language works237,207