MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614083744 · doi:10.1002/acn3.412

A novel design of a Phase III trial of isradipine in early Parkinson disease (STEADY‐PD III)

2017· article· en· W2614083744 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Biglan, David Oakes, Anthony E. Lang, Robert A. Hauser, Karen Hodgeman, Brittany M. Greco, Jillian Lowell, Rebecca L. Rockhill, Ira Shoulson, Charles S. Venuto, Diony Young, Tanya Simuni

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Clinical and Translational Neurology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsMedicineParkinson's diseaseAmbulatoryPlaceboCohortRating scaleQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyIsradipineClinical trialDiseaseInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective To describe the rationale for a novel study design and baseline characteristics of a disease‐modifying trial of isradipine 10 mg daily in early Parkinson disease ( PD ). Methods STEADY ‐ PDIII is a 36‐month, Phase 3, parallel group, placebo‐controlled study of the efficacy of isradipine 10 mg daily in 336 participants with early PD as measured by the change in the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale ( UPDRS ) Part I‐ III score in the practically defined ON state. Secondary outcome measures include clinically meaningful measures of disability progression in early PD : (1) Time to initiation and utilization of dopaminergic therapy; (2) Time to onset of motor complications; (3) Change in nonmotor disability. Exploratory measures include global measures of functional disability, quality of life, change in the ambulatory capacity, cognitive function, and pharmacokinetic analysis. Rationale for the current design and alternative design approaches are discussed. Results The entire cohort of 336 participants was enrolled at 55 Parkinson Study Group sites in North America. The percentage of male participants were 68.5% with a mean age of 61.9 years (sd 9.0), mean Hoehn and Yahr stage of 1.7 (sd 0.5), mean UPDRS total of 23.1 (sd 8.6), and Mo CA of 28.1 (sd 1.4). Interpretation STEADY ‐ PD III has a novel and innovative design allowing for the determination of longer duration benefits on clinically relevant outcomes in a relatively small cohort on top of the benefit derived from symptomatic therapy. Baseline characteristics are similar to those in previously enrolled de novo PD trials. This study represents a unique opportunity to evaluate the potential impact of a novel therapy to slow progression of PD disability and provide clinically meaningful benefits.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Clinical and Translational NeurologySame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207