MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2233464323 · doi:10.1186/1710-1492-10-s2-a32

The effect of the ragweed sublingual immunotherapy tablet MK-3641 on rescue medication use

2014· article· en· W2233464323 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sandra M. Gawchik, Peter S. Creticos, Kevin R. Murphy, Gary Berman, David I. Bernstein, Jennifer Maloney, Amarjot Kaur, Hendrik Nolte

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAllergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRagweedMedicinePlaceboAmbrosia artemisiifoliaPharmacotherapyClinical trialRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaDermatologyPharmacologyInternal medicineAllergyImmunologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Allergic rhinitis with/without conjunctivitis (AR/C) sufferers often rely on pharmacotherapy to relieve symptoms. Although the main goal of immunotherapy is long-term disease modification, reducing or eliminating the need for pharmacotherapy is also an important and desirable treatment goal. Data were pooled from two trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of short-ragweed sublingual immunotherapy tablet (SLIT-T), MK-3641 ( Ambrosia artemisiifolia ; Merck/ALK-Abelló). Subjects with ragweed-pollen–induced AR/C were randomized ~16 weeks before the 2010 pollen season to once-daily MK-3641 (6 or 12 Amb a 1-U doses; one trial also included a no-effect dose of 1.5 Amb a 1-U) or placebo. During the trial, all subjects, whether taking MK-3641 or placebo, could use AR/C rescue medication, including oral/ocular antihistamines and intranasal/oral corticosteroids. We examined rescue medication use in all groups. In pooled results from the two studies, 159 of 318 (50.0%) subjects receiving MK-3641 12 Amb a 1-U and 144 of 324 (44.4%) subjects receiving 6 Amb a 1-U used no rescue medication over the entire ragweed season, compared with 109 of 340 (32.1%) subjects receiving placebo. These differences represented 56% and 38% improvements over placebo. Similarly, during the peak ragweed season 173 of 311 (55.6%) subjects and 161 of 317 (50.8%) subjects in the 12 Amb a 1-U and 6 Amb 1-U groups, respectively, reported no rescue medication use, in contrast to 136 of 333 (40.8%) subjects receiving placebo. Fewer subjects taking 12 and 6 Amb a 1-U (28% and 19%, respectively) used oral antihistamine than those taking placebo; 35% and 28% fewer subjects used ocular antihistamine; and 43% and 27% fewer subjects used intranasal corticosteroid (oral corticosteroid was used by <5 subjects in any group, so rates were not calculated). Compared with placebo, the SLIT-T treatment MK-3641 reduced rescue-medication use among subjects with ragweed-pollen–induced AR/C.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergy Asthma and Clinical ImmunologySame topicAllergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFrench-language works237,207