MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396664925 · doi:10.1007/s12311-024-01697-8

Development and Validation of SCACOMS, a Composite Scale for Assessing Disease Progression and Treatment Effects in Spinocerebellar Ataxia

2024· article· en· W4396664925 on OpenAlexaff
Gilbert L’Italien, Evan Popoff, Basia Rogula, Lauren Powell, Michele Potashman, Sam Dickson, Patrick O’Keefe, Melissa Beiner, Vlad Coric, Susan B. Perlman, Jeremy D. Schmahmann, Suzanne Hendrix

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Cerebellum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal Health
FundersNational Ataxia FoundationBiohaven Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsSpinocerebellar ataxiaRating scaleAtaxiaClinical trialDiseaseNatural history studyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyCohortPsychologyInternal medicinePsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe CerebellumSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207