MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7109961825 · doi:10.64898/2025.12.03.25341225

Evaluating the Potential Clinical and Economic Impact of Clesrovimab for Infants in England and Wales

2025· article· W7109961825 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsMerck Canada Inc. (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalivizumabEconomic impact analysisEpidemiologyCohortCohort studyRespiratory tract infectionsCounterfactual thinkingClinical trialHealth careIntervention (counseling)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infects nearly all children under two years, causing mild lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) although serious disease, mortality and long-term recurrent wheezing can also occur. This study evaluates the health and economic impact of various RSV prevention strategies (monoclonal antibodies [mAb] such as clesrovimab, nirsevimab, palivizumab [high risk infants only] or maternal vaccination) in infants in England and Wales. Methods A previously published decision tree model was adapted to estimate RSV LRTIs and associated costs over one year among a cohort of infants entering their first RSV season in England and Wales. Clinical trial data were used for efficacy inputs alongside country-specific epidemiology and costs to assess the impact of year-round and seasonal mAb programs (without and with catch-up [for infants born out of season]) alongside maternal vaccination. Deterministic sensitivity analyses of incremental treatment costs and QALYs were performed. Results Seasonal administration of clesrovimab with and without catch-up led to fewer RSV-associated LRTI cases and lower treatment costs compared to other RSV intervention strategies. Without catch-up, clesrovimab reduced RSV-LRTI cases by 18%-27% versus palivizumab, 3%-4% versus nirsevimab and 2%-13% versus maternal vaccine. With catch-up, RSV-LRTI outcomes reductions by clesrovimab were greater: 60%-70% versus palivizumab, 14%-20% versus nirsevimab, and 43%-54% versus maternal vaccination. It also reduced treatment costs by £37.0 million compared to palivizumab, £4.0 million compared to nirsevimab, and £26.0 million compared to maternal vaccination. Coverage and efficacies were the most influential parameters. Conclusions Clesrovimab is projected to substantially reduce RSV-associated clinical outcomes and costs compared to both standard of care and potential new RSV prevention measures in England and Wales.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.393 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicRespiratory viral infections research→French-language works237,207→