Safety and physiological effects of two different doses of elosulfase alfa in patients with morquio a syndrome: A randomized, double‐blind, pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary treatment outcomes of a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, pilot study evaluating safety, physiological, and pharmacological effects of elosulfase alfa in patients with Morquio A syndrome are herewith presented. Patients aged ≥7 years and able to walk ≥200 m in the 6-min walk test (6MWT) were randomized to elosulfase alfa 2.0 or 4.0 mg/kg/week for 27 weeks. The primary objective was to evaluate the safety of both doses. Secondary objectives were to evaluate effects on endurance (6MWT and 3-min stair climb test [3MSCT]), exercise capacity (cardio-pulmonary exercise test [CPET]), respiratory function, muscle strength, cardiac function, pain, and urine keratan sulfate (uKS) levels, and to determine pharmacokinetic parameters. Twenty-five patients were enrolled (15 randomized to 2.0 mg/kg/week and 10 to 4.0 mg/kg/week). No new or unexpected safety signals were observed. After 24 weeks, there were no improvements versus baseline in the 6MWT, yet numerical improvements were seen in the 3MSCT with 4.0 mg/kg/week. uKS and pharmacokinetic data suggested no linear relationship over the 2.0-4.0 mg/kg dose range. Overall, an abnormal exercise capacity (evaluated in 10 and 5 patients in the 2.0 and 4.0 mg/kg/week groups, respectively), impaired muscle strength, and considerable pain were observed at baseline, and there were trends towards improvements in all domains after treatment. In conclusion, preliminary data of this small study in a Morquio A population with relatively good endurance confirmed the acceptable safety profile of elosulfase alfa and showed a trend of increased exercise capacity and muscle strength and decreased pain.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".