SMA valiant trial: A prospective, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial of valproic acid in ambulatory adults with spinal muscular atrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: An open-label trial suggested that valproic acid (VPA) improved strength in adults with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). We report a 12-month, double-blind, cross-over study of VPA in ambulatory SMA adults. METHODS: There were 33 subjects, aged 20–55 years, included in this investigation. After baseline assessment, subjects were randomized to receive VPA (10–20 mg/kg/day) or placebo. At 6 months, patients were switched to the other group. Assessments were performed at 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome was the 6-month change in maximum voluntary isometric contraction testing with pulmonary, electrophysiological, and functional secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty subjects completed the study. VPA was well tolerated, and compliance was good. There was no change in primary or secondary outcomes at 6 or 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: VPA did not improve strength or function in SMA adults. The outcomes used are feasible and reliable and can be employed in future trials in SMA adults.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".