MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503609914 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjw137

Evolving Concepts in Phases I and II Drug Development for Crohn’s Disease

2016· review· en· W2503609914 on OpenAlexaff
Vipul Jairath, Barrett G. Levesque, Niels Vande Casteele, Reena Khanna, Mahmoud Mosli, Pieter Hindryckx, Simon Travis, Marjolejn Duijvenstein, Jordi Rimola, Julián Panés, Geert D’Haens, William J. Sandborn, Brian G. Feagan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityRobarts Clinical Trials
FundersTakeda OncologyTillotts PharmaBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsDrug developmentCrohn's diseaseDrugDiseaseIntensive care medicinePharmacokineticsPharmacodynamicsDosingMedicineRisk analysis (engineering)Computer sciencePharmacologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The highest attrition rates during drug development programmes occur at the proof of concept stage. Given the large number of molecules under development for Crohn's disease, a need exists to improve the efficiency of early drug development by fast-tracking promising agents and terminating ineffective ones. Multiple opportunities are available to achieve these goals, including the use of more responsive outcome measures, and the incorporation of sophisticated pharmacokinetic modelling and/or highly specific pharmacodynamic markers into exposure-based dosing regimens and novel trial designs. In this article we review these strategies and propose an integrated paradigm of early drug development in Crohn's disease.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207