Pexelizumab, an Anti-C5 Complement Antibody, as Adjunctive Therapy to Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Complement, activated during myocardial ischemia and reperfusion, causes myocardial damage through multiple processes. The COMplement inhibition in Myocardial infarction treated with Angioplasty (COMMA) trial was performed to determine the effect of pexelizumab, a C5 complement inhibitor, on infarct size in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: In COMMA, 960 patients with MI (20% isolated inferior MI) were randomized to placebo, pexelizumab 2.0-mg/kg bolus, or pexelizumab 2.0-mg/kg bolus and 0.05-mg/kg per h infusion for 20 hours. Infarct size by creatine kinase-MB area under the curve, the primary outcome, did not differ significantly between groups (placebo median, 4393; bolus pexelizumab, 4526; bolus plus infusion pexelizumab, 4713 [ng/mL] x h; P=0.89 for bolus versus placebo; P=0.76 for bolus plus infusion versus placebo), nor did the composite of 90-day death, new or worsening heart failure, shock, or stroke (placebo, 11.1%; bolus, 10.7%; bolus plus infusion, 8.5%). The ninety-day mortality rate was significantly lower with pexelizumab bolus plus infusion (1.8% versus 5.9% with placebo; nominal P=0.014); the bolus-only group had an intermediate mortality rate (4.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ST-elevation MI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, pexelizumab had no measurable effect on infarct size. However, the significant reduction in mortality suggests that pexelizumab may benefit patients through alternative novel mechanisms and provides impetus for additional investigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".