MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169173228 · doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2021.05.024

Clinical effects of mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma according to background therapy: A meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3169173228 on OpenAlexaff
Njira Lugogo, Mark C. Liu, Ian Pavord, Patrick Mitchell, Steven G. Smith, Stephen Mallett, Frank C. Albers, Eric Bradford, Steven W. Yancey, Elisabeth H. Bel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology In Practice · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCollege of Pharmacy, University of MichiganMereo BioPharmaTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesInsmedAeglea BioTherapeuticsHuman Genome SciencesSanofiGlaxoSmithKlineRegeneron PharmaceuticalsGenentechUniversity of MichiganAstraZeneca
KeywordsMepolizumabMedicineMeta-analysisAsthmaEosinophilicInternal medicineEosinophilPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mepolizumab is an IL-5 antagonist mAb indicated for add-on maintenance treatment for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and refractory eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis.1 The Steroid Reduction with Mepolizumab Study (SIRIUS) trial (NCT01691508) demonstrated that mepolizumab reduced the maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) dose required for OCS-dependent patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, as well as the exacerbation rate.2 Other phase 2 and 3 trials including Mepolizumab as Adjunctive Therapy in Patients with Severe Asthma (MENSA) (NCT01691521), Mepolizumab Adjunctive Therapy in Subjects with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma on Markers of Asthma Control (MUSCA) (NCT02281318), and Dose Ranging Efficacy and Safety with Mepolizumab in Severe Asthma (DREAM) (NCT01000506) showed that mepolizumab plus standard of care therapy reduced exacerbations in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.047
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology In PracticeSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207