Efficacy and Safety of Sirolimus in Lymphangioleiomyomatosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM) is a progressive, cystic lung disease in women; it is associated with inappropriate activation of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling, which regulates cellular growth and lymphangiogenesis. Sirolimus (also called rapamycin) inhibits mTOR and has shown promise in phase 1-2 trials involving patients with LAM. METHODS: We conducted a two-stage trial of sirolimus involving 89 patients with LAM who had moderate lung impairment--a 12-month randomized, double-blind comparison of sirolimus with placebo, followed by a 12-month observation period. The primary end point was the difference between the groups in the rate of change (slope) in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)). RESULTS: During the treatment period, the FEV(1) slope was -12±2 ml per month in the placebo group (43 patients) and 1±2 ml per month in the sirolimus group (46 patients) (P<0.001). The absolute between-group difference in the mean change in FEV(1) during the treatment period was 153 ml, or approximately 11% of the mean FEV(1) at enrollment. As compared with the placebo group, the sirolimus group had improvement from baseline to 12 months in measures of forced vital capacity, functional residual capacity, serum vascular endothelial growth factor D (VEGF-D), and quality of life and functional performance. There was no significant between-group difference in this interval in the change in 6-minute walk distance or diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide. After discontinuation of sirolimus, the decline in lung function resumed in the sirolimus group and paralleled that in the placebo group. Adverse events were more common with sirolimus, but the frequency of serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with LAM, sirolimus stabilized lung function, reduced serum VEGF-D levels, and was associated with a reduction in symptoms and improvement in quality of life. Therapy with sirolimus may be useful in selected patients with LAM. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; MILES ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00414648.).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; 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".