Development and Validation of SCACOMS, a Composite Scale for Assessing Disease Progression and Treatment Effects in Spinocerebellar Ataxia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spinocerebellar ataxias (SCA) are rare inherited neurodegenerative disorders characterized by a progressive impairment of gait, balance, limb coordination, and speech. There is currently no composite scale that includes multiple aspects of the SCA experience to assess disease progression and treatment effects. Applying the method of partial least squares (PLS) regression, we developed the Spinocerebellar Ataxia Composite Scale (SCACOMS) from two SCA natural history datasets (NCT01060371, NCT02440763). PLS regression selected items based on their ability to detect clinical decline, with optimized weights based on the item's degree of progression. Following model validation, SCACOMS was leveraged to examine disease progression and treatment effects in a 48-week SCA clinical trial cohort (NCT03701399). Items from the Clinical Global Impression-Global Improvement Scale (CGI-I), the Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale (FARS) - functional stage, and the Modified Functional Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (f-SARA) were objectively selected with weightings based on their sensitivity to clinical decline. The resulting SCACOMS exhibited improved sensitivity to disease progression and greater treatment effects (compared to the original scales from which they were derived) in a 48-week clinical trial of a novel therapeutic agent. The trial analyses also provided a SCACOMS-derived estimate of the temporal delay in SCA disease progression. SCACOMS is a useful composite measure, effectively capturing disease progression and highlighting treatment effects in patients with SCA. SCACOMS will be a powerful tool in future studies given its sensitivity to clinical decline and ability to detect a meaningful clinical impact of disease-modifying treatments.
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 | 0.018 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".