Faculty Opinions recommendation of Dose-ranging study of riluzole in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis/Riluzole Study Group II.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive disease with no effective treatment. In an initial study, riluzole decreased mortality and slowed muscle-strength deterioration in ALS patients. We have carried out a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study to confirm those findings and to assess drug efficacy at different doses.METHODS: 959 patients with clinically probable or definite ALS of less than 5 years' duration were randomly assigned treatment with placebo or 50 mg, 100 mg, or 200 mg riluzole daily; randomisation was stratified by centre and site of disease onset (bulbar or limb). The primary outcome was survival without a tracheostomy. Secondary outcomes were rates of change in functional measures (muscle strength, functional status, respiratory function, patient's assessments of fasciculation, cramps, stiffness, and tiredness). The primary analysis was the comparison of the 100 mg dose with placebo by intention-to-treat. Drug-effect on survival was assessed before (log-rank test) and after adjustment for known prognostic factors (Cox's model).FINDINGS: At the end of the study, after median follow-up of 18 months, 122 (50.4%) placebo-treated patients and 134 (56.8%) of those who received 100 mg/day riluzole were alive without tracheostomy (unadjusted risk 0.79, p = 0.076; adjusted risk 0.65, p = 0.002). In the groups receiving 50 mg and 200 mg riluzole daily, 131 (55.3%) and 141 (57.8%) patients were alive without tracheostomy (relative to placebo 50 mg adjusted risk 0.76, p = 0.04; 200 mg 0.61, p = 0.0004). There was a significant inverse dose response in risk of death. No functional scale discriminated between the treatment groups. The most common adverse reactions were asthenia, dizziness, gastrointestinal disorders, and rises in liver enzyme activities; they were commonest with the 200 mg dose.INTERPRETATION: Overall, efficacy and safety results suggest that the 100 mg dose of riluzole has the best benefit-to-risk ratio. This study confirms that riluzole is well tolerated and lengthens survival of patients with ALS. PMID: 8676624
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.073 | 0.036 |
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".