MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308381477 · doi:10.1016/j.chest.2022.10.037

Efzofitimod for the Treatment of Pulmonary Sarcoidosis

2022· article· en· W4308381477 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daniel A. Culver, Shambhu Aryal, Joseph B. Barney, Connie C. W. Hsia, W. Ennis James, Lisa A. Maier, Lucian T. Marts, Ogugua Ndili, Peter H. S. Sporn, Nadera Sweiss, Sanjay Shukla, Nelson Kinnersley, Gennyne Walker, Robert P. Baughman

Bibliographic record

VenueCHEST Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRoivant SciencesFoundation for Sarcoidosis ResearchNational Institutes of HealthaTyrNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteMallinckrodt PharmaceuticalsSavara PharmaceuticalsAmerican Thoracic SocietyUniversity of CincinnatiGenentechUnited Therapeutics Corporation
KeywordsSarcoidosisMedicinePulmonary sarcoidosisIntensive care medicineDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary sarcoidosis is characterized by the accumulation of immune cells that form granulomas affecting the lungs. Efzofitimod (ATYR1923), a novel immunomodulator, selectively binds neuropilin 2, which is upregulated on immune cells in response to lung inflammation. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the tolerability, safety, and effect on outcomes of efzofitimod in pulmonary sarcoidosis? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating multiple ascending doses of efzofitimod administered intravenously every 4 weeks for 24 weeks, randomized patients (2:1) underwent a steroid taper to 5 mg/d by week 8 or < 5 mg/d after week 16. The primary end point was the incidence of adverse events (AEs); secondary end points included steroid reduction, change in lung function, and patient-reported outcomes on health-related quality-of-life scales. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients received at least one dose of study medication. Efzofitimod was well tolerated at all doses, with no new or unexpected AEs and no dose-dependent AE incidence. Average daily steroid doses through end of study were 6.8 mg, 6.5 mg, and 5.6 mg for the 1 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, and 5 mg/kg groups compared with 7.2 mg for placebo, resulting in a baseline-adjusted relative steroid reduction of 5%, 9%, and 22%, respectively. Clinically meaningful improvements were achieved across several patient-reported outcomes, several of which reached statistical significance in the 5 mg/kg dose arm. A dose-dependent but nonsignificant trend toward improved lung function also was observed for 3 and 5 mg/kg. INTERPRETATION: Efzofitimod was safe and well tolerated and was associated with dose-dependent improvements of several clinically relevant end points compared with placebo. The results of this study support further evaluation of efzofitimod in pulmonary sarcoidosis. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03824392; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations51
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCHEST JournalSame topicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity ResearchFrench-language works237,207