MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527538626 · doi:10.1097/mol.0000000000000354

New oral agents for treating dyslipidemia

2016· review· en· W2527538626 on OpenAlexaff
Steven E. Gryn, Robert A. Hegele

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Lipidology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipid metabolism and disorders
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersSanofiAstraZeneca
KeywordsDyslipidemiaMedicineInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We provide an overview of orally administered lipid-lowering therapies under development. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent data support statins for intermediate risk primary prevention, and ezetimibe for high-risk secondary prevention. Novel agents in development include bempedoic acid and gemcabene, and work continues on one remaining cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor, anacetrapib, to determine whether this class can reduce cardiovascular risk. Selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor modulators such as K-877 are under study to determine whether they have an advantage over older fibrates. Diacylglycerol transferase inhibitors such as pradigastat appear to have potent triglyceride-lowering effects, even for patients with familial chylomicronemia syndrome. Finally, novel ω-3 preparations are available with significant triglyceride lowering, although their role in therapy remains unclear. SUMMARY: Statins will remain the backbone of lipid-lowering therapy, although several novel oral agents are promising. The common theme across drugs in development is the demonstration of good lipid-lowering effect, although lacking cardiovascular outcomes data, which will likely be necessary before any of them, can be recommended or approved for widespread use.

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)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in LipidologySame topicLipid metabolism and disordersFrench-language works237,207