MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106185842 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181e1cec2

A phase I/II dose-escalation trial of vitamin D3 and calcium in multiple sclerosis

2010· article· en· W2106185842 on OpenAlexafffund
J.M. Burton, Samantha Kimball, Reinhold Vieth, Amit Bar‐Or, H. M. Dosch, R. Cheung, Donald Gagné, Carol Dsouza, Melanie R. Ursell, P. O’Connor

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsRockyview General HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenMcGill UniversityEtobicoke General HospitalSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalMount Sinai Hospital
FundersActelion PharmaceuticalsNational Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechMultiple Sclerosis SocietyNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesMultiple Sclerosis Society of CanadaEMD SeronoElanImmune Tolerance NetworkDairy Farmers of CanadaGlaxoSmithKlineBiogenSanofiTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesOno PharmaceuticalEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineTolerabilityVitamin D and neurologyInternal medicineExpanded Disability Status ScaleAdverse effectClinical endpointMultiple sclerosisRandomizationVitaminClinical trialGastroenterologyRandomized controlled trialvitamin D deficiencyConfoundingImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Low vitamin D status has been associated with multiple sclerosis (MS) prevalence and risk, but the therapeutic potential of vitamin D in established MS has not been explored. Our aim was to assess the tolerability of high-dose oral vitamin D and its impact on biochemical, immunologic, and clinical outcomes in patients with MS prospectively. METHODS: An open-label randomized prospective controlled 52-week trial matched patients with MS for demographic and disease characteristics, with randomization to treatment or control groups. Treatment patients received escalating vitamin D doses up to 40,000 IU/day over 28 weeks to raise serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] rapidly and assess tolerability, followed by 10,000 IU/day (12 weeks), and further downtitrated to 0 IU/day. Calcium (1,200 mg/day) was given throughout the trial. Primary endpoints were mean change in serum calcium at each vitamin D dose and a comparison of serum calcium between groups. Secondary endpoints included 25(OH)D and other biochemical measures, immunologic biomarkers, relapse events, and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients (25 treatment, 24 control) were enrolled [mean age 40.5 years, EDSS 1.34, and 25(OH)D 78 nmol/L]. All calcium-related measures within and between groups were normal. Despite a mean peak 25(OH)D of 413 nmol/L, no significant adverse events occurred. Although there may have been confounding variables in clinical outcomes, treatment group patients appeared to have fewer relapse events and a persistent reduction in T-cell proliferation compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose vitamin D (approximately 10,000 IU/day) in multiple sclerosis is safe, with evidence of immunomodulatory effects. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This trial provides Class II evidence that high-dose vitamin D use for 52 weeks in patients with multiple sclerosis does not significantly increase serum calcium levels when compared to patients not on high-dose supplementation. The trial, however, lacked statistical precision and the design requirements to adequately assess changes in clinical disease measures (relapses and Expanded Disability Status Scale scores), providing only Class level IV evidence for these outcomes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations359
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicVitamin D Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207