National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on Criteria for Clinical Trials in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: VI. The 2014 Clinical Trial Design Working Group Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment of chronic graft-versus-host disease is intended to produce a sustainable benefit by reducing symptom burden, controlling objective manifestations of disease activity, preventing damage and impairment, and improving overall survival without causing disproportionate harms related to the treatment itself. Successful management can control the disease until systemic treatment is no longer needed. The complexity of the disease, the extended duration of follow-up needed to observe disease resolution and withdrawal of immunosuppressive treatment, and the lack of fully developed shorter term endpoints impede progress in the field. Identification and characterization of primary endpoints demonstrating clinical benefit without requiring years of follow-up is urgently needed, with the understanding that clinical benefit encompasses not only the self-evident benefit of the primary endpoint but also any other associated benefits. This report discusses regulatory considerations, eligibility criteria, the value of controlled trial designs, the merits of proposed primary endpoints, and key considerations elaborated from experience and progress during the past decade. The report concludes by mapping an overall approach that could support and lead to maximally informative clinical trials, especially those that seek to demonstrate clinical benefit along a pathway to regulatory review and approval.
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 | 0.184 | 0.266 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
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".