MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4254832033 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2014.05.114

IC‐P‐108: VOLUMETRIC MRI RESULTS OF BMS AVAGACESTAT IN A PRODROMAL AD POPULATION

2014· article· en· W4254832033 on OpenAlexaff
Audrey Istace, Luc Bracoud, Robert Berman, Feng Luo, Florent Roche, Stephen Salloway, Christopher van Dyck, Bruno Dubois, Niels Andreasen, Mark Brody, Craig Curtis, Hilkka Soininen, Stephen Thein, Thomas Shiovitz, Steven H. Ferris, Joshua D. Grill, Sylvain Gouttard, Joël Schaerer, Wendy Hayes, Stephen Kaplita, Boubakeur Belaroussi, Hui Jing Yu, Jesse M. Cedarbaum, Howard Feldman, Chahin Pachaï, Vlad Coric

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrophyMedicineThird ventricleInternal medicineCohortDementiaPopulationBiomarkerFractional anisotropyNuclear medicineMagnetic resonance imagingCardiologyRadiologyWhite matterDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Avagacestat (BMS-708163), an oral γ-secretase inhibitor designed for selective inhibition of Aβ synthesis, was studied in Prodromal AD in a Phase 2 clinical trial (CN156-018). We assessed volumetric MRI changes of avagacestat versus placebo treated subjects in whole brain, lateral ventricles and hippocampus over the course of this multi-year study. 263 Prodromal AD subjects were selected, with the following inclusion criteria: MMSE 24 to 30, objective memory impairment, and CDR-global score of 0.5 with a memory box score ≥ 0.5, CSF Aβ42 levels < 200pg/mL or total tau/Aβ42 ratio ≥ 0.39. Subjects were excluded if they met DSM-IV-TR criteria for dementia. 3DT1 MRI scans were collected at Baseline, Weeks 24, 56 and 104 to assess whole brain, lateral ventricle and hippocampal volumes. Subjects were also scanned more frequently for safety monitoring. 20 additional subjects that met all clinical inclusion criteria but were amyloid-negative based on CSF biomarker levels entered an observational cohort and were scanned at Baseline and Week 60. Whole brain atrophy and lateral ventricle enlargement were assessed using Tensor Based Morphometry. Hippocampal atrophy was assessed using Boundary Shift Integral.Mean brain volume loss was measured at each volumetric timepoint after adjusting for time between scans. T-tests were also performed in order to compare atrophy results between treated and non-treated subjects. Mean volume loss for each structure of interest is reported in Tables 1-3. The results of the t-tests are shown on Table 4. As expected, biomarker-negative observational cohort subjects showed less loss of brain volume compared to Prodromal AD subjects after 1 year for brain (p<0.01), ventricles (p<0.05) and hippocampus (p<0.001).Volume loss was greater for avagacestat than placebo-treated subjects at Weeks 24 and 56 for brain (p<0.01), ventricles (p<0.05) and hippocampus (p<0.01). At Week 104, the difference was not significant. Biomarker-positive Prodromal AD subjects demonstrated greater brain atrophy at 1 year compared with biomarker-negative observational cohort subjects. Avagacestat-treated subjects exhibited greater volume loss than did placebo subjects, a seemingly paradoxical result similar to findings previously reported with other amyloid-lowering treatments such as AN1792 (Fox et al, Neurology 2005) or bapineuzumab (pooled analysis, Fox et al, CTAD 2012).

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments→French-language works237,207→