MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195231412

Inhibiteurs de la BTK approuvés au Canada contre la LLC : Stratégies de gestion des effets indésirables

2021· article· fr· W3195231412 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicole Dunse, Irene Hibbert, Sarah Doucette, Anna Christofides

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBruton's tyrosine kinaseGynecologyMedicinePolitical scienceTyrosine kinaseInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les inhibiteurs de la tyrosine kinase de Bruton (BTK) traitent efficacement la leucémie lymphoïde chronique (LLC), particulièrement chez les patients à haut risque. L’ibrutinib, inhibiteur de la BTK pionnier, est généralement bien toléré. Cependant, des effets indésirables particuliers et préoccupants, notamment une toxicité cardiovasculaire et des saignements, ont été observés, exigeant l’élaboration d’inhibiteurs de nouvelle génération comme l’acalabrutinib, qui présente un profil d’innocuité supérieure. Comme les inhibiteurs de la BTK sont administrés en continu et que l’interruption du traitement en diminue l’efficacité, la prise en charge thérapeutique appropriée des effets indésirables liés à un agent de cette classe est essentielle si l’on veut optimiser les résultats. Le présent article vise à former les infirmières en oncologie du Canada sur les inhibiteurs de la BTK actuellement approuvés au pays pour le traitement de la LLC. Il contient une description des profils d’innocuité bien particuliers des inhibiteurs de la BTK et propose des stratégies pour le suivi et la prise en charge des effets indésirables associés.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207