Satisfaction with alemtuzumab in relapsing multiple sclerosis patients: Results from the real-world PRO-ACT study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Patient-reported outcomes are increasingly used in the management of patients with multiple sclerosis to understand the patient's perspective of disease and treatment. These measures provide insights into important factors including treatment satisfaction, physical and psychological function, and quality of life. Objective To present results from the real-world PRO-ACT study in patients with multiple sclerosis who switched to alemtuzumab from another disease-modifying therapy. Methods This 24-month, prospective, multicenter, observational study had a primary endpoint of change in overall satisfaction, measured using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) version 1.4. Secondary endpoints included the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29), Modified Fatigue Impact Scale-5 (MFIS-5), and the Patient-Determined Disease Steps (PDDS). Safety was monitored with adverse events (AEs). Results Of 199 enrolled patients, improvements were observed in mean TSQM scores for overall satisfaction (baseline, 50.3; year 2, + 13.2; p < 0.0001), effectiveness (49.3 and + 12.2; p < 0.0001), and side effects (77.6 and + 4.5; p = 0.04). Improvements were also observed in MSIS-29 physical (52.4 and −6.0; p < 0.0001), MSIS-29 psychological (53.4 and −7.0; p = 0.0003), and MFIS-5 (12.8 and −1.7; p < 0.0001). Most (95.0%) patients experienced ≥ 1 AE (88.4% mild, 67.8% moderate). Conclusions The primary endpoint was met; the safety of alemtuzumab was consistent with pivotal studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".