MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394766814

Xdemvy<sup>TM</sup> (Lotilaner Ophthalmic Solution) 0.25% Topical Solution for the Treatment of <i>Demodex</i> Blepharitis.

2024· article· en· W4394766814 on OpenAlexaff
Aditya K. Gupta, Avantika Mann, Kimberly Vincent, William Abramovits

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and Effects
Canadian institutionsMediprobe Research (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemodexErythemaDermatologyMedicineBlepharitisSaturnMiteBiologyPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

blepharitis. Patients were assigned to receive either lotilaner 0.25% topical solution or vehicle (solution that did not contain lotilaner as an active ingredient) twice daily for 6 weeks. On day 43, lotilaner group demonstrated primary efficacy in achieving collarette cure ([collarette grade 0], Saturn-1: study group 44% [92/209], vehicle 7.4% [15/204]; Saturn-2: study group 56% [108/193], vehicle 12.5% [25/200]). Secondary efficacy was achieved by eradication of mite ([0 mite/lash], Saturn-1: study group 67.9% [142/209], vehicle 17.6% [36/304]; Saturn-2: study group 51.8% [99/193], vehicle 14.6% [29/200]), composite cure ([grade 0 collarette as well as grade 0 erythema], Saturn-1: study group 13.9% [29/209], vehicle 1.0% [2/204]; Saturn-2: study group 19.2% [37/193], vehicle 4% [8/200]), and erythema cure ([grade 0 erythema], study group 19.1% [40/209], vehicle 6.9% [14/204]; Saturn-2: study group 31.1% [60/193], vehicle 9.0% [18/199]). The adverse events were mild, with the most common being pain at instillation site. The recommended regimen for lotilaner 0.25% solution is one drop in each eye twice daily for 6 weeks.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and EffectsFrench-language works237,207