MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311910797 · doi:10.1212/nxi.0000000000200071

Long-term Efficacy of Satralizumab in AQP4-IgG–Seropositive Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder From SAkuraSky and SAkuraStar

2022· article· en· W4311910797 on OpenAlexaff
Ingo Kleiter, Anthony Traboulsee, Jacqueline Palace, Takashi Yamamura, Kazuo Fujihara, Albert Saiz, Adil Javed, David G. Mayes, Gaëlle Klingelschmitt, Daniela Stokmaier, Jeffrey L. Bennett

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersF. Hoffmann-La Roche
KeywordsNeuromyelitis opticaMedicineExpanded Disability Status ScaleInternal medicineGastroenterologySpectrum disorderDouble blindPlaceboAntibodyMultiple sclerosisImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Satralizumab, an interleukin 6 receptor inhibitor, reduced the risk of protocol-defined relapse (PDR) vs placebo in 2 independent, double-blind studies in patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). We assessed the long-term efficacy of satralizumab in patients with aquaporin-4-immunoglobulin G (IgG)-seropositive (AQP4-IgG+) NMOSD. METHODS: Following the double-blind periods of SAkuraSky (satralizumab + baseline immunosuppressive treatment [IST]) and SAkuraStar (satralizumab monotherapy), patients could enter the open-label extension (OLE, satralizumab 120 mg Q4W ± IST). This analysis included all AQP4-IgG+ patients who received ≥1 dose of satralizumab in the double-blind and/or OLE periods, from patients' first dose to the data cutoff (February 22, 2021). PDR in the OLE period was determined by the investigator without external adjudication. We evaluated time to first investigator-reported PDR (iPDR), severe iPDR (≥2 point increase in the Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] score), and sustained EDSS worsening (EDSS score increase of ≥2, ≥1, or ≥0.5 points for patients with baseline scores of 0, 1-5, or ≥5.5, respectively, confirmed ≥24 weeks post-initial worsening), plus the annualized iPDR rate (ARR). RESULTS: Forty-six of 55 AQP4-IgG+ patients (84%) in SAkuraSky and 57/64 patients in SAkuraStar (89%) continued from the double-blind periods into the OLEs. In total, 111 AQP4-IgG+ patients received ≥1 dose of satralizumab in the double-blind and/or OLE periods and were included in these analyses (SAkuraSky: 49; SAkuraStar: 62). The median (range) duration of satralizumab exposure was 4.4 (0.1-7.0) years in SAkuraSky and 4.0 (0.1-6.0) years in SAkuraStar, with a combined 440.1 patient-years of treatment. Seventy-one of 111 patients (64%) received satralizumab for ≥192 weeks (3.7 years). At this time point, 71% (SAkuraSky) and 73% (SAkuraStar) of satralizumab-treated patients were free from iPDR, 91% (SAkuraSky) and 90% (SAkuraStar) were free from severe iPDR, and 90% (SAkuraSky) and 86% (SAkuraStar) had no sustained EDSS worsening. The overall adjusted ARR (95% CI) was 0.12 (0.08-0.18) in SAkuraSky and 0.08 (0.05-0.13) in SAkuraStar and remained stable over time. DISCUSSION: These long-term results from the OLE periods of the SAkura studies demonstrate the continued efficacy of satralizumab over more than 3.5 years of treatment. High proportions of patients remained free from relapse, severe relapse, or worsening disease, with a consistently low ARR. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration numbers: NCT02028884 (SAkuraSky) and NCT02073279 (SAkuraStar). CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that satralizumab reduces the risk of relapse in patients with AQP4-IgG+ NMOSD beyond the first 96 weeks of treatment.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations66
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology Neuroimmunology & NeuroinflammationSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207