MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135134352 · doi:10.3109/10731190009119782

Gene Therapy for Hemophilia

2000· review· en· W2135134352 on OpenAlexaff
Gonzalo Hortelano, Patricia L. Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Cells Blood Substitutes and Biotechnology · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetic enhancementFactor IXMedicineCell therapyGene deliveryEx vivoGeneCoagulationIn vivoBioinformaticsImmunologyBiologyInternal medicineBiotechnologyCellGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hemophilia A and B are X-linked genetic disorders caused by deficiency of the coagulation factors VIII and IX, respectively. Because of the health hazards and costs of current product replacement therapy, much effort is devoted to the development of gene therapy for these disorders. Approaches to gene therapy for the hemophilias include: ex vivo gene therapy in which cells from the intended recipients are explanted, genetically modified to secrete Factor VIII or IX, and reimplanted into the donor; in vivo gene therapy in which Factor VIII or IX encoding vectors are directly injected into the recipient; and non-autologous gene therapy in which universal cell lines engineered to secrete Factor VIII or IX are enclosed in immuno-protective devices before implantation into recipients. Research into these approaches is aided by the many murine and canine models available. While problems of achieving high and sustained levels of factor delivery, and issues related to efficacy, safety and cost are still to be resolved, progress in gene therapy for the hemophilias has been encouraging and is likely to reach human clinical trial in the foreseeable future.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations19
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArtificial Cells Blood Substitutes and BiotechnologySame topicVirus-based gene therapy researchFrench-language works237,207