MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091803090 · doi:10.2217/fvl.12.30

Telaprevir for Retreatment of HCV Infection: Review of the REALIZE Trial

2012· article· en· W2091803090 on OpenAlexaff
Edward Kim, Yuan Yuan Chen, Eric M. Yoshida

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture Virology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis C virus research
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
FundersGilead SciencesPfizer
KeywordsTelaprevirRibavirinMedicineTolerabilityInternal medicineHepatocellular carcinomaPegylated interferonCirrhosisGastroenterologyPlaceboHepatitis C virusVirologyVirusAdverse effectPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An estimated 170 million people are chronically infected with HCV, which is a leading cause of cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and liver transplantation in North America. However, in patients infected with HCV genotype 1, 48 weeks of pegylated IFN-α and ribavirin treatment results in a sustained virologic response of only 40–50%. Therefore, development of effective regimens to eradicate HCV has been an urgent priority, especially in those patients who have a predicted low treatment response, partial responders and nonresponders. Telaprevir is a reversible, selective, orally bioavailable inhibitor of the HCV NS3/4A serine protease, and resembles the HCV polypeptide that is cleaved by the viral protease, a necessary step in replication. The REALIZE trial was a Phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of patients who were previously treated with pegylated IFN-α and ribavirin unsuccessfully for chronic genotype 1 HCV infection, with the aim to compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of telaprevir. This article reviews the background, study design and results of the REALIZE trial, and discusses the significance of these findings in the rapidly evolving treatment regimens for genotype 1 chronic HCV.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.345 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuture VirologySame topicHepatitis C virus researchFrench-language works237,207