MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330449754 · doi:10.2146/news110073

Deferiprone approved for iron overload

2011· article· en· W2330449754 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kate Traynor

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeferiproneMedicineNeutropeniaThalassemiaAdverse effectDrugClinical trialIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePharmacologyChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

FDA on October 14 announced the approval of deferiprone oral tablets for the treatment of transfusional iron overload in patients with thalassemia whose previous chelation therapy did not produce an adequate response. The drug will be marketed as Ferriprox by ApoPharma Inc. of Toronto. According to FDA, deferiprone was approved under the agency’s accelerated review process on the basis of the drug’s ability to reduce serum ferritin levels. In a dozen clinical studies involving a total of 236 patients with transfusional iron overload, serum ferritin levels fell by at least 20% in half of the patients treated with the drug. Approval of deferiprone was granted under the condition that the company will conduct a clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of the drug in patients with sickle cell disease who have transfusional iron overload. The labeling for deferiprone includes a boxed warning stating that the drug can cause agranulocytosis, which can lead to serious infections and death. This agranulocytosis may be preceded by neutropenia. The mechanism for deferiprone’s adverse effects on leukocytes is not known, according to the labeling.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.006

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Health-System PharmacySame topicHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207