MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2972700342 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2019.294

Does Resetting the Immune System Fix Multiple Sclerosis?

2019· article· en· W2972700342 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Gauruv Bose, Simon Thebault, Harold Atkins, Mark S. Freedman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMultiple sclerosisDiseaseImmune systemIntensive care medicineClinical trialImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple sclerosis is the leading non-traumatic cause of disability in young adults, affecting up to 100,000 Canadians. This chronic inflammatory and neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system leads to irreversible neurologic disability if inadequately controlled. Though many current medications are available that reduce inflammatory damage, most patients continue to show some evidence of disease activity and accrue disability. In this review, we discuss the role of immune ablation followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT), a therapeutic option for select patients with a more aggressive disease course. By "resetting" the immune system with a variety of ablative conditioning regimens, followed by immune reconstitution, this therapy has shown a durable response in halting evidence of inflammatory activity in most patients, without the need for continued disease-modifying therapies (DMT). Since the introduction of this therapy, there have been advances in patient selection and supportive care, such that morbidity has significantly declined and treatment-related mortality is minimized. Recent phase-II trials have shown excellent results in efficacy and safety of AHSCT; however, challenges exist which require ongoing study. The future challenges include comparing the variety of AHSCT conditioning regimens with each other as well as with existing highly effective DMT; identifying patients with an aggressive disease course through novel biomarkers who may benefit the most from AHSCT; and surveillance of long-term outcomes of different treatment protocols. In select patients, replacing the immune system with AHSCT holds promise of fundamentally altering the trajectory of their aggressive disease course.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies→French-language works237,207→