Pilot Study of Minocycline in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment is only partially effective and not all patients respond well. The goal in this study was to evaluate minocycline for its safety, tolerability, and MRI impact as a potential therapy over 36 months after a three month run-in in ten relapsing-remitting (RR) MS patients. METHODS: Clinical assessments were at three month intervals until six months, then at six month intervals. Three Tesla MRI was performed monthly during the run-in and first six months of treatment, then at 12, 24, and 36 months. RESULTS: Treatment was safe and well tolerated. Annualized relapse rate was 1.2 during the run-in and 0.25 during treatment. The proportion of active scans was lower during the first six months of treatment (5.6%, p < 0.001) and during the extension (8.7%, p = 0.002) than during the run-in (47.5%). Consistent with these outcomes, mean T2 lesion volume remained stable over three years and percent brain volume change was reduced during year three (-0.37%) of minocycline treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This trial is limited by small sample and no control group but suggests that minocycline is safe and potentially beneficial in RRMS. This supports further investigation of its efficacy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".