MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Casimersen for Duchenne muscular dystrophy

2021· article· en· W4200087363 on OpenAlexaff
Harry Wilton-Clark, Tsukasa Yokota

Bibliographic record

VenueDrugs of today · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsMuscular Dystrophy CanadaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineExon skippingDuchenne muscular dystrophyDystrophinExonMuscular dystrophyPopulationAntisense therapyBioinformaticsClinical trialPharmacologyInternal medicineGeneticsGeneOligonucleotideBiologyAlternative splicing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a genetic disorder affecting 1 in 5,000 males which causes progressive muscle deterioration, loss of mobility and eventual death, with an average lifespan of around 25 years. While no cure currently exists for DMD, a novel treatment known as antisense-mediated exon skipping therapy has shown great promise. Exon skipping therapy induces the skipping of mutated exons, restoring the reading frame in dystrophin transcripts and resulting in a truncated but partially functional protein product. In February 2021, Sarepta Therapeutics received accelerated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for their new antisense oligonucleotide, casimersen (brand name Amondys 45). Casimersen targets exon 45 of the dystrophin gene and is expected to treat ~8% of the DMD patient population. The continued approval of this drug will be dependent on satisfactory clinical results from an ongoing phase III trial. This article summarizes the preclinical and clinical data currently available for casimersen, emphasizing pharmacokinetics and safety.

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: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.027

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations35
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrugs of todaySame topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207