MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164524576 · doi:10.1586/eem.11.72

Laronidase for the treatment of mucopolysaccharidosis type I

2011· article· en· W2164524576 on OpenAlexaff
L. Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLysosomal Storage Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnzyme replacement therapyLysosomal storage disordersMucopolysaccharidosisLysosomeMedicineLysosomal storage diseaseMucopolysaccharidosis type IMucopolysaccharidosis IRecombinant DNAGenetic disorderEnzymeDiseaseInternal medicineBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A decade has passed since the initial report that parenteral use of recombinant human α-L-iduronidase results in amelioration of symptoms in patients with mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS I). As a result, MPS I became the first mucopolysaccharide storage disorder to benefit from enzyme replacement therapy (ERT); subsequent ERTs have been approved for MPS II and VI. The ability of lysosomal storage disorders to respond to ERT is unique among genetic disorders and relates to the capability of cells to take up recombinant lysosomal enzymes through cell surface receptors and deliver them to the lysosome, a processed coined as 'cross-correction'. Although the concept of ERT is straightforward, the evaluation of its efficacy in disorders like MPS I is challenging. This article reviews the use of laronidase in the management of MPS I, with a particular emphasis on the unique issues inherent in the evaluation of therapeutics for such a rare, complex and progressive disorder.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Endocrinology & MetabolismSame topicLysosomal Storage Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207