MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Five-Year Follow-up of Delayed-Release Dimethyl Fumarate in RRMS: Integrated Clinical Efficacy Data from the DEFINE, CONFIRM, and ENDORSE Studies (P7.234)

2015· article· en· W2175251478 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFungal Plant Pathogen Control
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDimethyl fumarateChemistryMedicineImmunologyMultiple sclerosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To report long-term (5-year minimum follow-up) clinical efficacy outcomes with delayed-release dimethyl fumarate (DMF; also known as gastro-resistant DMF) in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). BACKGROUND: DMF demonstrated broad efficacy and an acceptable safety profile in RRMS patients in the phase 3 DEFINE and CONFIRM studies; ENDORSE is an 8-year extension of DEFINE/CONFIRM. DESIGN/METHODS: Patients randomized to DMF 240 mg twice (BID) or three times daily (TID) in DEFINE/CONFIRM continued the same dosage in ENDORSE. Patients randomized to placebo (PBO; DEFINE/CONFIRM) or glatiramer acetate (GA; CONFIRM) were re-randomized 1:1 to DMF 240 mg BID or TID. Data were analyzed (May 14, 2014 cutoff) by treatment arm in parent/extension study: BID/BID, TID/TID, PBO/BID, PBO/TID, GA/BID, GA/TID. Results for DMF 240 mg BID are reported, as this represents the maintenance dosage of DMF approved for treatment of patients with relapsing MS. RESULTS: Of 2,079 patients completing DEFINE/CONFIRM, 1,736 were dosed in ENDORSE (n=501 [BID/BID], 502 [TID/TID], 249 [PBO/BID], 248 [PBO/TID], 118 [GA/BID], 118 [GA/TID]). Adjusted annualized relapse rates (ARRs) (95[percnt] confidence interval [CI]) for BID/BID during Years 1 and 2 (DEFINE/CONFIRM) and Years 3, 4, and 5 (ENDORSE) were 0.202 (0.162-0.252), 0.163 (0.128-0.208), 0.139 (0.105-0.184), 0.143 (0.109-0.188), and 0.138 (0.104- 0.183), respectively. For patients switching treatment from PBO or GA, the ARRs (95[percnt] CI) during Years 3, 4, and 5 were 0.176 (0.121-0.255), 0.131 (0.086-0.198), and 0.107 (0.068- 0.171) for PBO/BID and 0.182 (0.109-0.302), 0.137 (0.077-0.245), and 0.118 (0.062-0.225) for GA/BID, respectively. Estimated probability of disability progression remained low among patients continuing DMF. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with DMF was associated with low relapse rates and estimated probability of disability progression over 5 years; these results support its use as a long-term treatment option for patients with RRMS. Study Supported by: Biogen Idec

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.192 · 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