MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088332612 · doi:10.1016/j.msard.2020.102492

Shorter infusion time of ocrelizumab: Results from the randomized, double-blind ENSEMBLE PLUS substudy in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

2020· article· en· W3088332612 on OpenAlexaff
H-P Hartung, Thomas Berger, R. Bermel, Bruno Brochet, W.M. Carroll, Trygve Holmøy, Rana Karabudak, Joep Killestein, Carlos Nos, Francesco Patti, Amy Perrin Ross, Ludo Vanopdenbosch, Timothy Vollmer, Régine Buffels, M. Garas, Karen Kadner, Marco Manfrini, Q. Wang, MS Freedman

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersMerck KGaAFondation pour l'Aide à la Recherche sur la Sclérose en PlaquesNovartisTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesBayerCelgeneBiogenSanofi GenzymeF. Hoffmann-La RocheAgence Nationale de la RechercheRochePTC TherapeuticsUCB
KeywordsOcrelizumabMedicineMultiple sclerosisRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaClinical endpointVolunteerSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ocrelizumab is an approved intravenously administered anti-CD20 antibody for multiple sclerosis (MS). Shortening the 600 mg infusion to 2 hours reduces the total site stay from 5.5-6 hours (approved infusion duration including mandatory pre-medication and post-infusion observation) to 4 hours. The safety profile of shorter-duration ocrelizumab infusions was investigated using results from ENSEMBLE PLUS. METHODS: ENSEMBLE PLUS is a randomized, double-blind substudy to the single-arm ENSEMBLE study (NCT03085810). In ENSEMBLE, patients with early-stage relapsing-remitting MS received ocrelizumab 600 mg infusions every 24 weeks for 192 weeks. In ENSEMBLE PLUS, ocrelizumab 600 mg administered over the approved 3.5-hour infusion time (conventional duration) is compared with a 2-hour infusion (shorter duration); the durations of the initial infusions (2×300 mg, 14 days apart) were unaffected. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with infusion-related reactions (IRRs) following the first Randomized Dose. RESULTS: From November 1, 2018, to December 13, 2019, 745 patients were randomized 1:1 to the conventional or shorter infusion group. At the first Randomized Dose, 99/373 patients (26.5%) in the conventional and 107/372 patients (28.8%) in the shorter infusion group experienced IRRs. The majority of IRRs were mild or moderate; >99% of all IRRs resolved without sequelae in both groups (conventional infusion group, 99/99; shorter infusion group, 106/107). No IRRs were serious, life-threatening, or fatal. No IRR-related discontinuations occurred. During the first Randomized Dose, 22/373 (5.9%) and 39/372 (10.5%) patients in the conventional and shorter infusion groups, respectively, had IRRs leading to infusion slowing/interruption. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of ocrelizumab. CONCLUSION: The rates and severity of IRRs were similar between conventional and shorter infusions. No new safety signals were detected. Shortening the infusion time to 2 hours reduces the total site stay time (including mandatory pre-medication/infusion/observation) from 5.5-6 hours to 4 hours, and may reduce patient and site staff burden. A short video summarizing the key results is provided in supplemental material.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations27
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultiple Sclerosis and Related DisordersSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207