Phase 1–2 Trial of Antisense Oligonucleotide Tofersen for <i>SOD1</i> ALS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: mutations. METHODS: mutations. In each dose cohort (20, 40, 60, or 100 mg), participants were randomly assigned in a 3:1 ratio to receive five doses of tofersen or placebo, administered intrathecally for 12 weeks. The primary outcomes were safety and pharmacokinetics. The secondary outcome was the change from baseline in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) SOD1 concentration at day 85. Clinical function and vital capacity were measured. RESULTS: A total of 50 participants underwent randomization and were included in the analyses; 48 participants received all five planned doses. Lumbar puncture-related adverse events were observed in most participants. Elevations in CSF white-cell count and protein were reported as adverse events in 4 and 5 participants, respectively, who received tofersen. Among participants who received tofersen, one died from pulmonary embolus on day 137, and one from respiratory failure on day 152; one participant in the placebo group died from respiratory failure on day 52. The difference at day 85 in the change from baseline in the CSF SOD1 concentration between the tofersen groups and the placebo group was 2 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -18 to 27) for the 20-mg dose, -25 percentage points (95% CI, -40 to -5) for the 40-mg dose, -19 percentage points (95% CI, -35 to 2) for the 60-mg dose, and -33 percentage points (95% CI, -47 to -16) for the 100-mg dose. CONCLUSIONS: mutations, CSF SOD1 concentrations decreased at the highest concentration of tofersen administered intrathecally over a period of 12 weeks. CSF pleocytosis occurred in some participants receiving tofersen. Lumbar puncture-related adverse events were observed in most participants. (Funded by Biogen; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02623699; EudraCT number, 2015-004098-33.).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".