MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A demonstration of analytical similarity comparing a proposed biosimilar pegfilgrastim and reference pegfilgrastim

2017· article· en· W2625442506 on OpenAlexaff
S. Brokx, Louise A. Scrocchi, Nirmesh Shah, Jason Dowd

Bibliographic record

VenueBiologicals · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeutropenia and Cancer Infections
Canadian institutionsApotex (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPegfilgrastimBiosimilarSimilarity (geometry)MedicineComputer sciencePharmacologyFilgrastimInternal medicineArtificial intelligenceGranulocyte colony-stimulating factorChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF, filgrastim) is used primarily to reduce incidence and duration of severe neutropenia and its associated complications in cancer patients that have received a chemotherapy regimen. The pegylated form of filgrastim, "pegfilgrastim", is a long-acting form that requires only a once-per-cycle administration for the management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Apobiologix, a division of ApoPharma USA, Inc., and Intas Pharmaceuticals Limited have co-developed a proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar to US-licensed pegfilgrastim. METHODS: The analytical similarity of Apobiologix pegfilgrastim and US-licensed pegfilgrastim with respect to their physicochemical profile was established using a wide range of rigorous orthogonal analytical techniques. Biological function was compared using receptor binding analyses, in vitro proliferation assays, and in vivo hematopoietic progenitor mobilization. RESULTS: Apobiologix pegfilgrastim and the US-licensed pegfilgrastim reference product were found to be highly similar analytically with respect to molecular mass, primary, secondary and tertiary protein structures, purity, charge, and hydrophobicity. No differences in receptor binding affinity were observed, and all samples demonstrated similar in vitro and in vivo bioactivity. CONCLUSION: These studies provide robust evidence supporting the structural and functional similarity between Apobiologix pegfilgrastim and the US-licensed reference pegfilgrastim, and hence their biosimilarity.

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)0.003
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiologicalsSame topicNeutropenia and Cancer InfectionsFrench-language works237,207