MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396801928 · doi:10.51731/cjht.2024.890

Inclisiran (Leqvio)

2024· article· en· W4396801928 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
CADTH

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStatinInternal medicineAtherosclerotic cardiovascular diseaseClinical trialCause of deathDrugAdverse effectDiseaseCholesterolQuality of life (healthcare)Pharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CADTH recommends that Leqvio not be reimbursed by public drug plans as an adjunct to lifestyle changes, including diet, to further reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in adults who are on a maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of a statin, with or without other LDL-C–lowering therapies, and who have nonfamilial hypercholesterolemia (nFH) with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Evidence from 2 clinical trials showed that treatment with Leqvio lowered bad cholesterol (LDL-C) in adults with nFH with ASCVD who were already being treated with the highest possible dose of statins and in those who cannot tolerate treatment with statins. A post hoc pooled analysis of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) from the ORION-10 and ORION-11 trials precluded the Canadian Drug Expert Committee (CDEC) from determining whether inclisiran reduces the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and death in adults with nFH with ASCVD. Patients identified a need for treatments that are less burdensome, can reduce bad cholesterol (LDL-C) and cardiovascular morbidity and death, and improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL); however, there was not enough evidence to show that Leqvio would reduce cardiovascular morbidity and death or improve HRQoL.

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)0.003
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.010

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 venueCanadian Journal of Health TechnologiesSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207