MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387439239 · doi:10.1111/jvim.16897

Fuzapladib in a randomized controlled multicenter masked study in dogs with presumptive acute onset pancreatitis

2023· article· en· W4387439239 on OpenAlexaff
Jöerg M. Steiner, Chantal Lainesse, Yuya Noshiro, Yumiko Domen, Heather Sedlacek, Stephen E. Bienhoff, Kelly Doucette, David Bledsoe, Hiroshi Shikama

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Internal Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAcute pancreatitisPlaceboPancreatitisInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialConfidence intervalGastroenterologyClinical trialAdverse effectPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Currently, no specific treatment is available for acute onset pancreatitis (AP), and management relies on symptomatic and supportive standard of care (SOC). Fuzapladib is a novel leukocyte function-associated antigen type-1 (LFA-1) activation inhibitor, blocking activation and subsequent adhesion and migration of neutrophils, potentially decreasing the risk of pancreatitis progression and systemic inflammation. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the safety and clinical response of dogs with AP after 3 days of administration of fuzapladib. ANIMALS: Sixty-one client-owned dogs with presumptive AP. METHODS: Randomized, masked, and placebo controlled multicenter study. Sixty-one dogs with AP were included for safety assessment, whereas 35 evaluable cases (fuzapladib, n = 16; placebo, n = 19) were included for clinical evaluation. Clinical improvement was assessed based on the change in the modified clinical activity index (MCAI) score on Day 3 compared to Day 0. Secondary variables included canine acute pancreatitis clinical severity index (CAPCSI) scores and serum concentrations of canine pancreatic lipase immunoreactivity, cytokines, and C-reactive protein. RESULTS: Fuzapladib was well tolerated by all treated dogs. Mean change in MCAI scores was significantly higher in the fuzapladib-treated (-7.75) than the placebo group (-5.68; P = .02, 95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference, -4.33, -0.35), suggesting clinical improvement in fuzapladib-treated dogs. No significant difference was found in any of the secondary variables between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Administration of fuzapladib to dogs was safe, and a favorable response was detected in 2 clinical activity scores. Effects of fuzapladib on survival and duration of hospitalization were not studied.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized 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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Internal MedicineSame topicPancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207