Slowing of Brain Volume Loss in Patients With Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis After Switching From Subcutaneous Interferon Beta-1a to Alemtuzumab (P7.264)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine brain volume changes in patients who switched to alemtuzumab after receiving subcutaneous interferon beta-1a (SC IFNB-1a) in the CARE-MS core studies. BACKGROUND: In two phase 3 head-to-head trials in active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients, alemtuzumab demonstrated superior efficacy versus SC IFNB-1a, including reduction in brain volume loss over 2 years by 42[percnt] in treatment-naive patients (CARE-MS I; NCT00530348) and by 24[percnt] in patients who relapsed on prior therapy (CARE-MS II; NCT00548405). DESIGN/METHODS: In the CARE-MS studies, SC IFNB-1a-treated patients received 44 μg 3 times/week for 2 years. These patients subsequently entered an extension study (NCT00930553) and received alemtuzumab 12 mg/day intravenously on 5 consecutive days and on 3 consecutive days 12 months later. Magnetic resonance imaging scans were acquired at baseline and yearly thereafter. Brain volume loss was measured by brain parenchymal fraction (BPF) change. RESULTS: The extension enrolled 144 (83.2[percnt]) and 146 (83.4[percnt]) SC IFNB-1a-treated patients from CARE-MS I and II, respectively; 91.7[percnt] and 89.7[percnt] received 2 alemtuzumab courses; 4.9[percnt] and 8.2[percnt] received 1 course; and 5.6[percnt] and 4.8[percnt] of patients discontinued from study. Among CARE-MS I patients, the median yearly rate of BPF loss was reduced from -0.50[percnt] in Year 2 of SC IFNB-1a treatment to -0.13[percnt] in the second year after switching to alemtuzumab (Year 4). Among CARE-MS II patients, the median yearly BPF loss was reduced from -0.35[percnt] in Year 2 of SC IFNB-1a treatment to -0.06[percnt] in the second year of alemtuzumab treatment (Year 4). CONCLUSIONS: The yearly rate of brain volume loss was markedly reduced after switching from SC IFNB-1a to alemtuzumab. These findings further confirm the superior efficacy of alemtuzumab in RRMS patients who received at least 2 years of prior SC IFNB-1a disease-modifying therapy. Study Supported by: Genzyme, a Sanofi company, and Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".