MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Immunogenicity Assessment of Pegfilgrastim in Patients with Breast Cancer

2020· article· en· W3030930859 on OpenAlexaff
Yu. V. Medvedev, М. А. Колганова, O. A. Sas, Т. Н. Комаров, Е. Н. Фишер, I. E. Shohin, Yu. I. Ammour

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug development & registration · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeutropenia and Cancer Infections
Canadian institutionsCanadian Public Health Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPegfilgrastimMedicineFilgrastimImmunogenicityNeutropeniaImmunoassayInternal medicineBreast cancerCancerOncologyAntibodyImmunologyChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction. Neutropenia, which is an abnormally low concentration of neutrophils in the blood, is one of the common side effects in patients receiving radio- or chemotherapy. Neutropenia usually leads to higher risks of severe bacterial and fungal infections. Such medicines as colonystimulating factor filgrastim (and its conjugates) are used to prevent and treat neutropenia in oncology patients. Immunogenicity is a potential concern for any biological product, thus, its assessment is one of the most critical necessities during the development and registration of such products. Aim. The main aim of this study was to validate the ELISA method for anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies detection in human serum samples and to apply the validated method to pegfilgrastim drugs immunogenicity assessment. Materials and methods. To assess pegfilgrastim immunogenicity, the commercial ELISA kit «PEGylated Filgrastim (Neulasta®) ADA ELISA» was used for screening, confirmatory and titer assay. Moreover, to confirm the chosen commercial kit suits the study aims it was revalidated. The absorbance values were obtained using plate immunoassay analyzer Stat Fax 3200, plate washing was performed using an automatic twochannel plate washer. Results and discussion. The ELISA method for anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies determination in human serum samples was validated and applied to the analytical part of the comparative, multicenter, blind, randomized study of pegfilgrastim efficacy and safety in patients with breast cancer, receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Human serum samples were first screened for anti-drug antibodies, then «screening positive» samples were analyzed in confirmatory assay with % inhibition calculation for each sample. The «confirmed positive» samples were further characterized in titer assay. Conclusions. The ELISA method for anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies determination in human serum samples was successfully validated and applied for pegfilgrastim drugs immunogenicity assessment.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug development & registrationSame topicNeutropenia and Cancer InfectionsFrench-language works237,207