Placebo effect in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy: The <scp>PATH</scp> study and a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Polyneuropathy And Treatment with Hizentra (PATH) study required subjects with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) to show dependency on immunoglobulin G (IgG) and then be restabilized on IgG before being randomized to placebo or one of two doses of subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIG). Nineteen of the 51 subjects (37%) randomized to placebo did not relapse over the next 24 weeks. This article explores the reasons for this effect. A post-hoc analysis of the PATH placebo group was undertaken. A literature search identified other placebo-controlled CIDP trials for review and comparison. In PATH, subjects randomized to placebo who did not relapse were significantly older, had more severe disease, and took longer to deteriorate in the IgG dependency period compared with those who relapsed. Published trials in CIDP, whose primary endpoint was stability or deterioration, had a mean non-deterioration (placebo effect) of 43%, while trials with a primary endpoint of improvement had a placebo response of only 11%. Placebo is an important variable in the design of CIDP trials. Trials designed to show clinical improvement will have a significantly lower effect of this phenomenon than those designed to show stability or deterioration.
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 | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".