Surface Response Modeling to Examine the Combination of Amphotericin B Deoxycholate and 5‐Fluorocytosine for Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The strategy of combining antifungal drugs in a treatment regimen may improve the outcome of invasive candidiasis. Using a well-validated pharmacodynamic murine model of invasive candidiasis, we defined the effect of the combination of amphotericin B deoxycholate (AmB) and 5-fluorocytosine (5FC) by use of the Greco model of drug interaction. The combination was additive, meaning that the experimental effect did not deviate in a statistically significant manner from the null reference model (or additive surface) of the combined effect. From a clinical perspective, the addition of 5FC to a regimen of AmB may enable the near-maximum effect to be reached in circumstances in which the administration of a given dose of AmB alone produces a submaximum effect but an increase in the dose is not possible, because of dose-related toxicity. Our methods provide a way in which some of the complex issues surrounding antifungal combination treatment can be addressed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".