Disease-Modifying Drugs for Multiple Sclerosis and Association With Survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We examined the association between the disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) and survival in a multiregion population-based study. METHODS: We accessed multiple administrative health databases from 4 Canadian provinces. Persons with MS were identified and followed from the most recent of the first MS or demyelinating event or January 1, 1996 (index date), until death, emigration, or December 31, 2017. Association between the first-generation and second-generation DMDs and all-cause mortality was examined using stratified Cox proportional hazard models, reported as adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs). Timing of DMD initiation was explored, with findings reported at 2, 5, or 10 years postindex date, representing very early, early, or late initiation. RESULTS: < 0.05), while later initiation was not (95% CIs included 1). However, the survival advantage with earlier initiation diminished over time, no longer reaching statistical significance at 15 years postindex date. DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates an association between the DMDs for MS and improved survival in the real-world setting.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".