MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333285099 · doi:10.4161/gmic.27712

Vaccination against<i>Clostridium difficile</i>using toxin fragments

2014· article· en· W2333285099 on OpenAlexaff
Janice Spencer, Rosanna Leuzzi, Anthony M. Buckley, June Irvine, Denise Candlish, Maria Scarselli, Gill Douce

Bibliographic record

VenueGut Microbes · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClostridium difficileClostridium difficile toxin AVaccinationClostridium difficile toxin BBiologyToxinMicrobiologyVirologyGlucosyltransferaseDiarrheaRecombinant DNAAntibodyImmunologyAntibioticsMedicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clostridium difficile is a major cause of antibiotic associated diarrhea. Recently, we have shown that effective protection can be mediated in hamsters through the inclusion of specific recombinant fragments from toxin A and B in a systemically delivered vaccine. Interestingly while neutralizing antibodies to the binding domains of both toxin A and B are moderately protective, enhanced survival is observed when fragments from the glucosyltransferase region of toxin B replace those from the binding domain of this toxin. In this addendum, we discuss additional information that has been derived from such vaccination studies. This includes observations on efficacy and cross-protection against different ribotypes mediated by these vaccines and the challenges that remain for a vaccine which prevents clinical symptoms but not colonization. The use and value of vaccination both in the prevention of infection and for treatment of disease relapse will be discussed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations28
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGut MicrobesSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207