MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

318.5: Emerging data from a study of tegoprubart for the prevention of rejection in kidney transplant recipients: Implications for a similar study in islet cell transplantation

2023· article· en· W4387877440 on OpenAlexaff
John S. Gill, Patrick T. Coates, Jean Tchervenkov, Jeffrey D. Bornstein, Paul Harden, Matthew Kadatz, Piotr Witkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePanel reactive antibodyTransplantationRegimenTacrolimusImmunosuppressionKidney transplantationKidneyImmunologyIsletTransplant rejectionImmune systemInternal medicineInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Islet cell transplantation has the potential to be a functional cure for type 1 diabetes, but this option is infrequently used, in part because of the untoward effects of one of the anti-rejection medications, tacrolimus, which can be toxic to the implanted cells, necessitating multiple transplants. Tegoprubart is a monoclonal antibody directed against the CD40 ligand (CD40L), a key mediator of co-stimulation. Inhibition of CD40L should result in a decrease in both cell and antibody mediated immunity and create a more tolerogenic immune environment. Importantly, tegoprubart is not toxic to islet cells. Tegoprubart has been shown to be effective in animal models of both islet cell and kidney transplantation and is currently being studied in kidney transplant recipients. Methods: In the ongoing kidney transplantation study, up to 12 adults receiving a kidney transplant from either a living or deceased donor will be enrolled. To be eligible, this must be their first transplant, they must be seropositive for EBV, free of donor specific antigens, have low panel reactive antibodies, and the organ cannot be from an extended criteria donor or have a prolonged cold ischemia time. All participants will receive rATG induction and a maintenance regimen consisting of tegoprubart 20 mg/kg IV administered every 3 weeks after an initial loading regimen, mycophenolate and corticosteroids. Enrollment of the first 4 participants is staggered such that the Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) needs to review the data from the first 28 days on study of the preceding participant before the next participant can be enrolled. Participants will remain on study for a year, after which time they will have the option of continuing tegoprubart in an extension study. The primary endpoint is safety. Secondary endpoints include characterizing the pharmacokinetic profile of tegoprubart, the incidence of biopsy proven rejection (BPAR), changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and exploratory biomarkers including donor derived cell free DNA. Results: The study is ongoing. As of the abstract submission deadline, May 2023, 5 participants have been transplanted, and 3 are ongoing. No participant has experienced rejection. One discontinued due to an SAE of BK viremia and another for mild alopecia and fatigue. BK viremia was the only SAE reported to date, and the drug appears safe and well tolerated. Participant information is summarized in Table 1, and mean eGFR is summarized in Figure 1. Conclusions: Data to date from this calcineurin free study are encouraging, with no rejections, a good safety profile and excellent allograft function. These data support studying tegoprubart in a population of islet cell transplant recipients to assess whether this will improve outcomes in this setting. Such a study is planned by investigators at the University of Chicago.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207