MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406294772 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvaf001

IGF-1 Assessment During Weekly Somatrogon Treatment in Pediatric Patients With GH Deficiency

2025· article· en· W4406294772 on OpenAlexaff
Satyaprakash Nayak, Michael P. Wajnrajch, Joan Korth‐Bradley, Carrie Turich Taylor, M. Thomas, Aristides K Maniatis, Cheri Deal, Ron G. Rosenfeld, José Cara, Patanjali Ravva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersPfizer
KeywordsDosingContext (archaeology)PharmacodynamicsPharmacokineticsMedicineGrowth hormone deficiencyGrowth hormoneInternal medicineHormoneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context: In patients with GH deficiency (GHD) receiving GH treatment, IGF-1 concentrations are used by physicians to monitor treatment safety and efficacy and guide dosing decisions. Somatrogon is a long-acting GH approved as a once-weekly treatment for pediatric GHD. Somatrogon administration results in characteristic changes in the IGF-1 profile, with values measured at 96 hours postdose representing mean IGF-1 concentrations that best reflect overall somatrogon exposure. Objective: To develop a simple method to enable physicians to predict mean IGF-1 concentrations following somatrogon dosing, based on a single IGF-1 measurement taken at any point during the 7-day dosing interval. Methods: Data from phase 2 and phase 3 somatrogon studies were used to develop a 2-compartment pharmacokinetic model with delayed first-order absorption. An indirect-response pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model was applied to the predicted somatrogon concentrations, and model simulations were used to predict IGF-1 and IGF-1 SD score (SDS) levels for participants in both studies. Results: A total of 16,213 dosing records (from 42 and 109 participants in the phase 2 and 3 studies, respectively) were used for the simulations, generating predicted values for IGF-1 and IGF-1 SDS. Predicted values were scaled against the respective values at 96 hours (day 4). These values were used to create a table showing the adjustments required to predict mean IGF-1 and IGF-1 SDS values depending on time after dose. Conclusion: We developed a simple method enabling physicians to predict mean weekly IGF-1 values using IGF-1 values measured at any point in the dosing interval.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth FactorsFrench-language works237,207