MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378983268 · doi:10.1002/jbm4.10758

A Phase I Randomized Trial of Once‐Daily Versus <scp>Twice‐Daily</scp> Recombinant Human Parathyroid Hormone (1‐84) for Hypoparathyroidism

2023· article· en· W4378983268 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJBMR Plus · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid and Parathyroid Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersTakeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A.
KeywordsHypoparathyroidismParathyroid hormoneRecombinant DNAMedicineHormoneInternal medicineEndocrinologyCalciumBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Recombinant human parathyroid hormone (1‐84), rhPTH(1‐84), is an approved adjunctive treatment to oral calcium and active vitamin D for adult patients with hypoparathyroidism; however, there is limited information on the effect of twice daily (BID) dosing of rhPTH(1‐84). This was a phase I, open‐label, randomized, crossover, multicenter study conducted in adult patients with chronic hypoparathyroidism. The primary objective was to assess the pharmacokinetic profile and pharmacodynamic effects of 1 day of treatment with rhPTH(1‐84) administered subcutaneously at 25 μg BID, 50 μg BID, and 100 μg once daily (QD) with or without supplemental oral calcium. Safety and tolerability were evaluated as secondary objectives. In total, 33 patients with chronic hypoparathyroidism completed the study. Treatment with rhPTH(1‐84), both BID and QD, over the short‐term maintained serum calcium, lowered serum phosphorus, decreased urinary calcium excretion, and increased urinary phosphorus excretion. The decrease in urinary calcium excretion was numerically greater for BID than QD. Generally, baseline‐adjusted pharmacokinetic parameters including area under the curve and maximum observed concentration increased with increasing rhPTH(1‐84) dose, although this effect was not dose proportional. No new safety findings were observed. Our study revealed no differences thought to be clinically meaningful in pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic parameters with BID versus QD rhPTH(1‐84) dosing. Future long‐term studies are warranted to further elucidate the effects of alternative dosing strategies. © 2023 Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc and The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.295 · 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