A Placebo-Controlled Trial of Oral Cladribine for Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cladribine provides immunomodulation through selective targeting of lymphocyte subtypes. We report the results of a 96-week phase 3 trial of a short-course oral tablet therapy in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1326 patients in an approximate 1:1:1 ratio to receive one of two cumulative doses of cladribine tablets (either 3.5 mg or 5.25 mg per kilogram of body weight) or matching placebo, given in two or four short courses for the first 48 weeks, then in two short courses starting at week 48 and week 52 (for a total of 8 to 20 days per year). The primary end point was the rate of relapse at 96 weeks. RESULTS: Among patients who received cladribine tablets (either 3.5 mg or 5.25 mg per kilogram), there was a significantly lower annualized rate of relapse than in the placebo group (0.14 and 0.15, respectively, vs. 0.33; P<0.001 for both comparisons), a higher relapse-free rate (79.7% and 78.9%, respectively, vs. 60.9%; P<0.001 for both comparisons), a lower risk of 3-month sustained progression of disability (hazard ratio for the 3.5-mg group, 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.93; P=0.02; and hazard ratio for the 5.25-mg group, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.96; P=0.03), and significant reductions in the brain lesion count on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Adverse events that were more frequent in the cladribine groups included lymphocytopenia (21.6% in the 3.5-mg group and 31.5% in the 5.25-mg group, vs. 1.8%) and herpes zoster (8 patients and 12 patients, respectively, vs. no patients). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with cladribine tablets significantly reduced relapse rates, the risk of disability progression, and MRI measures of disease activity at 96 weeks. The benefits need to be weighed against the risks. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00213135.)
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".