MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762482610 · doi:10.15326/jcopdf.4.4.2017.0164

The COPD Pipeline XXXVI

2017· article· en· W2762482610 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nicholas J. Gross

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases Journal of the COPD Foundation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEmera
KeywordsPipeline (software)COPDMedicineComputer scienceInternal medicineProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contract Pharma is a publication that reviews, among other things, the pharmaceutical industry annually.Those of us who work in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) take an interest in the source of the drugs we use and Contract Pharma brings that information to us.Each year they report the status of the top 25 pharmaceutical companies. 1For each pharma, a report lists the newly approved drugs, those pending approval, drugs in phase 2, those in early research, drugs coming off patent, and some other less interesting data.There is usually a tussle between Pfizer and Novartis for the top.For the 2017 report (which is based on 2016 sales) Pfizer, Inc., is number 1.As I sift through the top 25 pharma companies, I look for drugs that might be the ones we will one day be prescribing for our patients with COPD.Pfizer has no new COPD drugs anywhere in the process of development unless one includes Prevnar 13 which was just approved.Next is Novartis which has Fevipiprant, an interesting CRTh2 antagonist in phase 1.But it is for an asthma indication.Merck, at number 3, has MK-1029, also a CRTh2 antagonist, but also in trials as a potential asthma therapy.Merck has no agents in development for COPD.Nor, going down the list, has Roche.GlaxoSmithKline has Relvar Elipta (recently approved), a triple for COPD that is pending the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) review, and mepolizumab for COPD.Next on the list are Sanofi, Johnson & Johnson, Gilead, and ABBVie with no COPD drugs.Then AstraZeneca with Bevespi/Aerosphere and benralizumab both in phase 2 for a COPD indication.Teva has several drugs for asthma but none for COPD.Next on the list are Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Bayer.Finally, Boehringer Ingelheim has worked with Hamni Pharmaceuticals on HCP1202 for COPD.It is in a Phase 2 trial.Then, moving down the list, comes a desert with no potential COPD drugs, -Novo Nordisk, Merck KGAA, Takeda, Allergan, Biogen, Shire, and Celgene.Mylan brings the list to a close with its revefenacin, a nebulized long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) in phase 3. The point here is that the third largest cause of death in most of the world needs more novel therapies.Other than the me-too's, we have just 2 '-lizumabs' in the works for COPD.Cancer, heart, and diseases of ageing are all well represented in late stage development, which is appropriate.But COPD should be up there with them. Autologous bronchial basal cells transplantation isThe COPD Pipeline XXXVI

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2320.139

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases Journal of the COPD FoundationSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207