MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4379446433

Current and emerging treatment strategies for Duchenne muscular dystrophy

2016· article· en· W4379446433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mah JK

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuchenne muscular dystrophyMuscular dystrophyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jean K Mah Department of Pediatrics and Clinical Neurosciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada Abstract: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is the most common form of muscular dystrophy in childhood. It is caused by mutations of the DMD gene, leading to progressive muscle weakness, loss of independent ambulation by early teens, and premature death due to cardiorespiratory complications. The diagnosis can usually be made after careful review of the history and examination of affected boys presenting with developmental delay, proximal weakness, and elevated serum creatine kinase, plus confirmation by muscle biopsy or genetic testing. Precise characterization of the DMD mutation is important for genetic counseling and individualized treatment. Current standard of care includes the use of corticosteroids to prolong ambulation and to delay the onset of secondary complications. Early use of cardioprotective agents, noninvasive positive pressure ventilation, and other supportive strategies has improved the life expectancy and health-related quality of life for many young adults with DMD. New emerging treatment includes viral-mediated microdystrophin gene replacement, exon skipping to restore the reading frame, and nonsense suppression therapy to allow translation and production of a modified dystrophin protein. Other potential therapeutic targets involve upregulation of compensatory proteins, reduction of the inflammatory cascade, and enhancement of muscle regeneration. So far, data from DMD clinical trials have shown limited success in delaying disease progression; unforeseen obstacles included immune response against the generated mini-dystrophin, inconsistent evidence of dystrophin production in muscle biopsies, and failure to demonstrate a significant improvement in the primary outcome measure, as defined by the 6-minute walk test in some studies. The long-term safety and efficacy of emerging treatments will depend on the selection of appropriate clinical end points and sensitive biomarkers to detect meaningful changes in disease progression. Correction of the underlying mutations using new gene-editing technologies and corticosteroid analogs with better safety profiles offers renewed hope for many individuals with DMD and their families. Keywords: Duchenne muscular dystrophy, emerging treatment, standard of care, review

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.381 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicMuscle Physiology and Disorders→French-language works237,207→