MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622896366 · doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2017.04.010

Treatment Effect and Safety of Icatibant in Pediatric Patients with Hereditary Angioedema

2017· article· en· W2622896366 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Werner Aberer, Teresa Caballero, Laura McCarthy, James Hao, Wolfram Nothaft, Jennifer Schranz, Jonathan A. Bernstein, H. Henry Li

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology In Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and Angioedema
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBioCrystViropharmaMcMaster UniversityTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesSwedish Orphan BiovitrumCSL BehringGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsIcatibantHereditary angioedemaMedicineC1-inhibitorAngioedemaErythemaPediatricsAdverse effectPopulationDermatologyInternal medicineBradykinin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Clinical manifestations of hereditary angioedema with C1 inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) usually begin in childhood, often intensifying during puberty. Currently there are insufficient efficacy/safety data for HAE therapies in children and adolescents due to the small number of pediatric patients enrolled in studies. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this phase 3 study was to evaluate the efficacy/safety of a single subcutaneous dose of icatibant (0.4 mg/kg; maximum 30 mg) in pediatric patients with C1-INH-HAE. METHODS: Patients aged 2 years to younger than 18 years were categorized as prepubertal (children) and pubertal/postpubertal (adolescents). The primary end point was time to onset of symptom relief-earliest time posttreatment to 20% or more improvement in composite symptom score. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients received icatibant (safety population: 11 children with attack, 10 adolescents without attack, and 11 adolescents with attack). The efficacy population consisted of 11 children and 11 adolescents with edematous attacks. Most attacks in the efficacy population (16 [72.7%]) were cutaneous, 5 (22.7%) were abdominal, and 1 (4.5%) was both cutaneous and abdominal; none was laryngeal. Overall, the median time to onset of symptom relief was 1.0 hour, the same for children and adolescents. Thirty-two treatment-emergent adverse events (all mild or moderate) occurred in 9 (28.1%) patients. Gastrointestinal symptoms were most common (9 events in 3 [9.4%] patients). Injection-site reactions affected most (90.6%) patients (particularly erythema and swelling), but almost all resolved by 6 hours postdose. Icatibant demonstrated a monophasic plasma concentration-time profile. Time to peak concentration was approximately 0.5 hours postdose. CONCLUSIONS: Symptom relief was rapid, and a single icatibant injection in pediatric patients with C1-INH-HAE was well tolerated (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01386658).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations56
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology In PracticeSame topicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and AngioedemaFrench-language works237,207