.
This workshop was run at JupyterCon 2025 in San Diego, California, USA. Included in this upload are the template notes document and a PDF version of the slides. The slides were buitl using reveal.js and the source code for them can be found on the following GitHub repository: open-source-practices/users-of-jupyterhub-jupytercon-nov-2025: Materials for the Users of JupyterHub workshop at JupyterCon Session abstract Join JupyterHub's project team and other users and administrators of JupyterHub for a half day workshop exploring their experiences, perspectives, and ideas for the future of the project. The session will forge closer links between JupyterHub's volunteer community and Hub administrators, while collectively identifying improvement opportunities and strengthening community-driven development. We'll kick off with lightning talks showcasing diverse JupyterHub implementations across education, research, and industry, sparking cross-domain knowledge sharing. We'll then reflect on different aspects of the project and community in focused breakout sessions before coming back together to discuss as a group. Finally, we'll explore practical opportunities for direct contribution to the project. This session is aimed at those who have deployed or used JupyterHub at least once before, and would like to share their experiences and learn from others. The core team will also be looking for opportunities to more publicly celebrate their contributors to JupyterHub, both online, and with physical tokens of appreciation.
Background The biosimilarity for erythropoietin (EPO) functionality of GBPD002 (test candidate) and Eprex® (comparator) has been evaluated by comparing the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties following subcutaneous injection.Methods This was a randomized, double-blinded, two-sequence, crossover clinical trial. Subjects were randomly assigned and received a dose (4,000 IU) of either the test or comparator EPO, and received the alternative formulations after 4-weeks of washout period.Results The PK parameters, viz ., maximum observed concentration (Cmax) and area under the curve extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-inf), were calculated with the serum EPO concentrations from blood samples and were found comparable for both formulations. The geometric mean ratios (at 90% CI) of the Cmax and AUCinf were 0.89 and 1.16, respectively, which were within the regulatory range of 0.80 – 1.25. The time-matched serum EPO concentrations and PD markers (reticulocyte, hematocrit, hemoglobin, and red blood cell) denoted a counterclockwise hysteresis, suggesting a time delay between the observed concentration and the response. ANOVA-derived P- values (>0.05) for the effectors clearly revealed the similarity between effects on PD markers for the test and comparator drugs. Both formulations were found tolerated well, and anti-drug antibodies were not observed.Conclusions Thus, the two formulations are projected to be used interchangeably in clinical settings.### Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.### Clinical TrialNCT05585658### Funding StatementGlobe Biotech Limited funded this research.### Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The protocol for the study has got ethical clearance from the institutional review board (IRB; The Ethics Committee of Farabi General Hospital Ltd.) and was approved by the Directorate General of Drug Administration (DGDA) of BangladeshI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript* CV : coefficient of variation SD : standard variation CI : confidence interval GMR : geometric mean ratio aGMR: (90% CI) of the test to the comparator epoetin alfa b Tmax (h) : Mean (lowest-highest) AUC0–144 h : area under the curve from time zero to the time of the last observation AUC0-inf : area under the curve extrapolated to infinity Cmax : maximum observed serum EPO concentration CL/F : total clearance MRTlast : mean residence time t1/2 : terminal half-life aTmax : time of Cmax SD : standard deviation, aMean difference (90% CI) between the test and the comparator epoetin alfa ANOVA : analysis of variance ΔAUEC : area under the baseline-adjusted effect curve ΔEmax : maximum effect change bTmax : time of Emax
