MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103392274 · doi:10.1586/17476348.2014.918507

Inhaled liposomal amikacin

2014· review· en· W2103392274 on OpenAlexaff
Valerie Waters, Félix Ratjen

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Respiratory Medicine · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAmikacinPharmacologyLiposomeIntensive care medicineAntimicrobialNanotechnologyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arikace™ is a novel formulation of inhaled liposomal amikacin that can penetrate deep within airway secretions and within Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms, making it an attractive therapeutic option for the treatment of cystic fibrosis (CF) pulmonary infections. Initial Phase I and Phase II studies in CF patients with chronic P. aeruginosa infection demonstrated that Arikace™ was a safe drug that resulted in significant improvements in lung function after 14-28 days of treatment. Phase III studies of inhaled liposomal amikacin compared to tobramycin inhalation solution in CF patients with P. aeruginosa infection revealed a comparable increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 second at the end of three cycles. In addition, inhaled liposomal amikacin has other potential applications in the management of difficult-to-treat pulmonary infections. A Phase II trial is currently underway to study the use of Arikace™ for the treatment of recalcitrant nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Citations47
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Respiratory MedicineSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207