MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7019295057

Forced degradation studies: an essential tool for the formulation development of vaccines

2013· review· en· W7019295057 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein purification and stability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForced degradationDegradation (telecommunications)BioprocessPhase (matter)Protein degradation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Manvi Hasija, Lillian Li, Nausheen Rahman, Salvador F Ausar BioProcess Research and Development, Sanofi Pasteur, Toronto, ON, Canada Abstract: Forced degradation studies are typically conducted during the early development phase of vaccine candidates to obtain information on potential degradation pathways, support analytical methods development, and identify potential vaccine stabilizers and optimal conditions for long-term storage. The regulatory guidelines for forced degradation regarding biologics have few to no procedural instructions on how to approach forced degradation studies. In this review, we provide an overview of methods used to study forced degradation in vaccines, mechanisms of degradation, analytical methodology, forced degradation examples conducted for vaccine products, and a summary of stabilizers that are used to influence the results of new vaccine candidates. Keywords: vaccine, formulation, stability, pathways of degradation, stabilizers

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.293 · 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