MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404120972 · doi:10.24908/qap.v1i2.18099

Lecanemab for Alzheimer's Disease

2024· article· en· W4404120972 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yasmine Abossi

Bibliographic record

VenueQapsule Queen s Undergraduate Health Sciences Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseComputer scienceMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lecanemab is a novel drug developed by Sisai and Biogen aimed at treating Alzheimer’s Disease. Alzheimer’s Disease is characterized by the misfolding and accumulation of neurotoxic amyloid-beta plaques in the brain, leading to neuronal cell death and brain shrinkage. Lecanemab contains monoclonal antibodies that have a high affinity for soluble and insoluble forms of amyloid-beta peptides. These antibodies bind, neutralize, and eliminate amyloid-beta aggregates to slow Alzheimer’s Disease progression.2 Phase II dose-finding trial for Lecanemab conducted with 854 participants with early Alzheimer’s Disease demonstrated no significant difference between Lecanemab and placebo groups at the 12-month mark. However, a 27% reduction in clinical decline in the Lecanemab group was seen after 18 months compared to the placebo group. Adverse effects of Lecanemab include transient fever and asymptomatic fluid formation in the brain. The drug was approved by the Food and Drug Administration and launched in the United States on January 18, 2023. Manufacturing and marketing applications for Lecanemabwere also recently submitted in Europe, Japan, and Canada1 With FDA approval, the drug is currently priced at 26,500 USD per year, with Medicare pledging to cover 80% of the cost.3

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.010

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.337 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQapsule Queen s Undergraduate Health Sciences JournalSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207