MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417206891 · doi:10.1016/j.rpth.2025.103021

HTRS2025.P1.1 Safety and efficacy of Mim8 prophylaxis in patients with hemophilia A with or without inhibitors: Results from the phase 3, open-label, randomized controlled FRONTIER2 study

2025· article· en· W4417206891 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Vlady Ostrow, Chandrakala Shanmukhaiah, Pernille Juul Jørgensen, Johannes Oldenburg, Maria Elisa Mancuso, Tadashi Matsushita, Pratima Chowdary, Steven R. Lentz, Johnny Mahlangu, Ilgiz Rakhmatullin

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedicinski Fakultet, Sveučilište u ZagrebuNational Health Laboratory ServiceMcMaster UniversityNovo NordiskSveučilište u Zagrebu
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialPhase (matter)Clinical trialAdverse effectMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mim8 (denecimig) is a factor VIIIa mimetic bispecific antibody in clinical development for subcutaneous prophylaxis in hemophilia A (HA).Objectives: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of Mim8 in males and females (aged ≥12 years) with HA with or without inhibitors.in 5.0-12.2% of patients.There were no safety concerns and no clinical evidence of neutralizing anti-Mim8 antibodies.Conclusions: FRONTIER2 demonstrated superiority of Mim8 prophylaxis once-every-week and once-every-month in reducing ABR for treated bleeds compared with either on-demand treatment or clotting factor concentrate prophylaxis.Mim8 was well tolerated, and no safety concerns were observed.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueResearch and Practice in Thrombosis and HaemostasisSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207