MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953947897 · doi:10.1002/cpdd.720

A First‐in‐Human Phase 1 Randomized Single and Multiple Ascending Dose Study of RPh201 in Healthy Volunteers

2019· article· en· W2953947897 on OpenAlexaff
Zadik Hazan, Konstantin Adamsky, Andre Lucassen, Leonard A. Levin

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology in Drug Development · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedicinal Plants and Neuroprotection
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTolerabilityAdverse effectDosingPlaceboRandomized controlled trialErythemaSingle CenterAnesthesiaInternal medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RPh201 is a drug extracted from gum mastic that has been studied for its anti-inflammatory and antibacterial properties. Preclinical studies of RPh201 demonstrated neuroprotective and neuroenhancing effects. Toxicology studies in animals did not reveal safety concerns or genotoxic effects. This single-center, phase 1, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-masked study in healthy volunteers assessed the safety and tolerability of RPh201, and determined the highest tolerated dose. There were 2 parts: a single ascending dose (SAD) stage, followed by a multiple ascending dose (MAD) stage. Three dosing arms were included in each stage (5 mg, 10 mg, and 20 mg). Safety data in the lower dosing arms were evaluated before higher doses were initiated. Eighteen participants were randomized in the SAD stage: 12 to RPh201 (4 at each dose) and 4 to placebo. Twenty-one participants were randomized in the MAD stage, of which 13 received RPh201. All 18 participants in the SAD stage completed treatment. Sixteen of the 21 participants in the MAD stage completed treatment. The most frequently reported adverse events were local injection site pain and erythema. No deaths or adverse events related to changes in vital signs or electrocardiograms were reported. No occurrences of suicidal behavior or ideation were reported.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology in Drug DevelopmentSame topicMedicinal Plants and NeuroprotectionFrench-language works237,207