MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2188248721

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of TNF Antagonists in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

2014· article· en· W2188248721 on OpenAlexaff
Reena Khanna, Barrett G. Levesque, William J. Sandborn, Brian G. Feagan

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTherapeutic drug monitoringInflammatory bowel diseaseTumor necrosis factor alphaDrugDiseaseTherapeutic indexPharmacokineticsInternal medicineConfoundingConcomitantImmunologyPharmacology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonists play a critical role in the treatment of moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), several factors can impact treatment response. The degree of systemic inflammation, serum albumin concentration, disease type, body mass index, gender, concomitant therapy with immunosuppressive agents, and especially development of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) are key determinants of TNF antagonist pharmacokinetics and clinical outcomes. Therefore, measurement of serum drug and antibody concentrations in patients with IBD who are on TNF antagonists has the potential to guide clinical decision-making, optimize treatment, improve outcomes, and reduce healthcare costs. Multiple strategies to prevent ADA formation exist, including multiple clinical algorithms that employ therapeutic drug monitoring to optimize treatment following a secondary loss of therapeutic response. An individualized approach is needed, however, to identify early predictors of ADA development and other confounders of TNF antagonist therapy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→