Assessing the utility of magnetic resonance imaging-based “SuStaIn” disease subtyping for precision medicine in relapsing-remitting and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient stratification and individualized treatment decisions based on multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical phenotypes are arbitrary. Subtype and Staging Inference (SuStaIn), a published machine learning algorithm, was developed to identify data-driven disease subtypes with distinct temporal progression patterns using brain magnetic resonance imaging; its clinical utility has not been assessed. The objective of this study was to explore the prognostic capability of SuStaIn subtyping and whether it is a useful personalized predictor of treatment effects of natalizumab and dimethyl fumarate. METHODS: Subtypes were available from the trained SuStaIn model for 3 phase 3 clinical trials in relapsing-remitting and secondary progressive MS. Regression models were used to determine whether baseline SuStaIn subtypes could predict on-study clinical and radiological disease activity and progression. Differences in treatment responses relative to placebo between subtypes were determined using interaction terms between treatment and subtype. RESULTS: Natalizumab and dimethyl fumarate reduced inflammatory disease activity in all SuStaIn subtypes (all p < 0.001). SuStaIn MS subtyping alone did not discriminate responder heterogeneity based on new lesion formation and disease progression (p > 0.05 across subtypes). CONCLUSION: SuStaIn subtypes correlated with disease severity and functional impairment at baseline but were not predictive of disability progression and could not discriminate treatment response heterogeneity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.036 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".