MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962487873 · doi:10.1177/1352458519851981

Characterizing lymphocyte counts and infection rates with long-term teriflunomide treatment: Pooled analysis of clinical trials

2019· article· en· W2962487873 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron Miller, Myriam Bénamor, Philippe Truffinet, Elizabeth M. Poole, Mark S. Freedman

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSanofi GenzymeSanofi
KeywordsTeriflunomideMedicineInternal medicineLymphocytePlaceboMultiple sclerosisClinical trialImmunologyGastroenterologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In Phase 3 studies, teriflunomide reduced relapse rates and disability progression compared with placebo; however, decreases in lymphocyte counts were also observed. OBJECTIVE: To describe the effect of long-term teriflunomide treatment on lymphocyte counts and infection rates among patients in pooled analyses of Phase 3 core and extension studies. METHODS: Four randomized trials (TEMSO, TOWER, TENERE, and TOPIC) compared teriflunomide 7 mg or 14 mg treatment with either placebo and/or subcutaneous interferon (IFN) β-1a 44 µg in patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS) (or first clinical episode suggestive of MS in TOPIC). RESULTS: In 1895, patients ever exposed to teriflunomide, mean (standard deviation) absolute lymphocyte counts declined from Week 0 (1.89 (0.59)) to Week 24 (1.67 (0.52)) and then remained stable thereafter. In the core plus extension studies (up to 10.7 years), 7.3% and 2.2% experienced Grade 1 and Grade 2 lymphopenia, respectively. Infections were reported in 56.9% of patients without lymphopenia, 60.9% with Grade 1 lymphopenia, and 54.8% with Grade 2 lymphopenia. Serious infections occurred in 3.7%, 4.3%, and 7.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Long-term risk of lymphopenia and infections in patients who continue to receive teriflunomide is low, demonstrating a limited impact on adaptive and innate immunity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultiple Sclerosis JournalSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207