A controlled trial of intravenous immunoglobulin in multifocal motor neuropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) has become the standard treatment for multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) based on limited data. To critically assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 10% liquid IVIG (IVIG), 44 adults with MMN were randomized 1 : 1 to either double-blind treatment of IVIG followed by placebo for 12 weeks each or the reverse. Open-label IVIG was administered for 12 weeks at the beginning and end of the study for clinical stabilization, and between double-blinded periods to prevent a carry-over effect. To avoid potential worsening, switching to open-label IVIG was permitted if deterioration occurred during blinded treatment. Mean maximal grip strength of the more affected hand declined 31.38% during placebo and increased 3.75% during IVIG (p = 0.005). In 35.7% of participants, Guy's Neurological Disability scores for upper limbs worsened during placebo and not during IVIG, whereas the converse was true in 11.9% (p = 0.021). Sixty-nine percent (69.0%) switched prematurely from placebo to open-label IVIG and 2.4% switched from blinded to open-label IVIG (p < 0.001). One serious adverse reaction (pulmonary embolism) and 100 non-serious reactions (69 mild, 20 moderate, and 11 severe) to IVIG occurred. IVIG was effective in improving disability and muscle strength, and was safe and well tolerated in adults with MMN.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".