MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123303925 · doi:10.3324/haematol.2014.112821

Alloantibodies to therapeutic factor VIII in hemophilia A: the role of von Willebrand factor in regulating factor VIII immunogenicity

2015· review· en· W2123303925 on OpenAlexaff
Johannes Oldenburg, Sébastien Lacroix‐Desmazes, David Lillicrap

Bibliographic record

VenueHaematologica · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersGrifolsSwedish Orphan BiovitrumBiogenPfizer
KeywordsVon Willebrand factorImmunogenicityImmunologyAntibodyFactor IXAntigenImmune systemRecombinant DNAMedicineBiologyInternal medicineGeneticsGenePlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rising incidence of neutralizing antibodies (inhibitors) against therapeutic factor VIII prompted the conduct of studies to answer the question as to whether this rise is related to the introduction of recombinant factor VIII products. The present article summarizes current opinions and results of non-clinical and clinical studies on the immunogenic potential of recombinant compared to plasma-derived factor VIII concentrates. Numerous studies provided circumstantial evidence that von Willebrand factor, the natural chaperone protein present in plasma-derived factor VIII products, plays an important role in protecting exogenous factor VIII from uptake by antigen presenting cells and from recognition by immune effectors. However, the definite contribution of von Willebrand factor in reducing the inhibitor risk and in the achievement of immune tolerance is still under debate.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations40
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaematologicaSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207