MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139558409 · doi:10.1586/1744666x.2014.907743

Immunotherapy of HPV infection-caused genital warts using low dose cyclophosphamide

2014· review· en· W2139558409 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jie Zhao, Wanjiang Zeng, Yuchun Cao, Xiaoyu Liang, Bo Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Clinical Immunology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineGenital wartsSubclinical infectionCyclophosphamideImmunosuppressionImmunologyImmunotherapyCytotoxic T cellSex organImmune systemChemotherapyInternal medicineBiologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Condylomata acuminata (CA), caused by human papillomavirus (HPV), is a common sexually transmitted disease with half a million new cases diagnosed in the United States per year and an annual increase in incidence in China. Conventional treatments, including topical cytotoxic agents, surgical excision and physical therapies, are traumatic, cause local side-effects and are invalid for subclinical or latent infection. Exploring immune approaches to eradicate HPV in CA therapeutics are highly desirable. Recent evidence shows that FOXP3(+) regulatory T (Treg) cells are accumulated in genital warts where they mediate immunosuppression. Intriguingly, a low dose of cyclophosphamide (CY), a conventional chemotherapy drug, can selectively target Treg cells, thereby enhancing the function of HPV-specific T cells and NK cells leading to efficient clearance of HPV infection. These findings have important clinical significance, and could potentially lead to a therapeutic breakthrough for the treatment of CA.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Clinical ImmunologySame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207