MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085430830 · doi:10.1517/13543784.11.12.1795

Novel therapies for sepsis: antiendotoxin therapies

2002· review· en· W2085430830 on OpenAlexaff
Sanjay Manocha, Daniel Feinstein, Aseem Kumar, Anand Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Investigational Drugs · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences CentreManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSepsisLipopolysaccharideImmune systemLipid AMonoclonal antibodyImmunologyReceptorSeptic shockBiologyAntibodyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Severe sepsis and septic shock is a common problem encountered in the critical care unit with an estimated incidence in the US of 750,000 cases/year and a mortality rate of 30-50%. Sepsis involves a complex interaction between bacterial factors and the host immune system producing a systemic inflammatory state that may progress to multiple organ failure and death. Endotoxin (a lipopolysaccharide) released from Gram-negative bacteria has been implicated as a potent, prototypical stimulus of the immune response to bacterial infection. Current antiendotoxin strategies utilise various approaches ranging from the prevention of binding to endotoxin receptors with antibodies (monoclonal or polyclonal) against endotoxin or endotoxin receptor/carrier molecules (antiCD14 or antilipopolysaccharide-binding protein antibodies), enhancing clearance or neutralisation (haemoperfusion, lipoproteins, lipopolysaccharide-neutralising proteins) or impairing cellular signalling (lipid A analogues, tyrosine kinase inhibitors). In the future, innovative therapies involving Toll-like receptors and their downstream signalling elements will be developed. This review discusses current knowledge regarding endotoxin signalling, antiendotoxin therapies currently under development, and future areas for research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations49
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Investigational DrugsSame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207