Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to discuss the most important recent clinical studies in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), including their impact on clinical practice, their methodology, and open questions to be addressed in the future. RECENT FINDINGS: This article focuses on studies, which provided either a positive primary endpoint or positive post hoc analysis, including edaravone, sodium phenylbutyrate-taurursodiol, rasagiline, tofersen, and high-caloric, fat-rich nutrition. It also covers recent developments in the design of clinical ALS studies with regard to inclusion criteria, stratification factors, and outcome parameters. SUMMARY: Recent clinical studies have indicated various substances to be considered for treatment of ALS. Edaravone has been approved by the US Food and Drug Association (FDA) but not by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and further studies testing oral formulations are currently conducted. A follow-up study with sodium phenylbutyrate-taurursodiol is ongoing, while follow-up studies for rasagiline and high-caloric, fat-rich nutrition are planned. A phase III study with tofersen was negative but nevertheless yielded promising results. Important developments regarding the design of clinical ALS studies include the implementation of neurofilament light chain (NfL) levels as a standard outcome parameter and the consideration of progression rate for therapeutic response and stratification.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".