MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804284536 · doi:10.1136/jnnp-2018-anzan.59

060 Association of brain volume loss and neda outcomes in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis in the opera i and opera ii studies (ENCORE)

2018· article· en· W2804284536 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Traboulsee, Douglas L. Arnold, Eric C. Klawiter, Eva Havrdová, Damian Fiore, Ray Zheng, Laura Julián, Gavin Giovannoni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsNeuroRx Research (Canada)McGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOcrelizumabMedicineMallinckrodtBrain sizeMultiple sclerosisMagnetic resonance imagingLaryngologyAtrophyInternal medicineNeurologyNuclear medicineRadiologySurgeryRituximab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Brain volume loss (BVL) occurs in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, reflecting irreversible tissue damage. No evidence of disease activity (NEDA), a composite measure assessing absence of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) disease activity has emerged as important treatment goal in MS and may be associated with preservation of brain tissue and BVL prevention. Methods Patients in OPERA-I/II ( NCT01247324 /NCT01412333) received 600 mg ocrelizumab (intravenous) very 24 weeks or 44 µg subcutaneous interferon beta-1a (IFNβ-1a) 3x-weekly for 96 weeks. Brain MRI assessments were completed at baseline and 24/48/96 Weeks. Brain volume normalised for head size was measured using SIENAX software. Percent change in whole brain volume (WBV) was determined using SIENA software, changes in cortical grey (GMV) and white (WMV) matter volumes were measured using validated, locally developed Jacobian integrator atrophy software. NEDA was defined as absence of relapses, 12-week confirmed disability progression, T1 Gd–enhancing lesions and new and/or enlarging T2-lesions. Changes from baseline in brain volume were examined in NEDA patients and those with evidence of disease activity (EDA), using the mixed-effects model for repeated measures method. Results The analysis included 1520 patients (ocrelizumab-761; IFNβ-1a-759). Over 96 weeks, 569 (37%) patients [ocrelizumab-363 (48%); IFNβ-1a-206(27%); p<0.001] had NEDA. Compared with EDA patients, NEDA patients had significantly less WBV loss from baseline (30%-reduction; p<0.001). In the NEDA group, ocrelizumab patients had significantly less WBV loss (32%-reduction; p<0.001), WMV loss (34%-reduction; p=0.044) and GMV loss (30%-reduction; p<0.001) from baseline than IFNβ-1a patients. In the EDA group, ocrelizumab patients had significantly less WBV loss (11%-reduction; p=0.047) and GMV loss (21%-reduction; p<0.001) but not WMV loss (1.03%-increase; p=0.90) from baseline than IFNβ-1a patients. Conclusion These findings highlight the importance of NEDA as treatment goal with respect to brain tissue preservation regardless of treatment choice. Ocrelizumab may confer additional benefits in NEDA patients NEDA beyond what is observed with IFNβ-1a.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & PsychiatrySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207