MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405390476 · doi:10.1007/s40120-024-00680-z

Long-Term Safety and Effectiveness of Dimethyl Fumarate in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Treated in Routine Medical Practice: Final Analysis of the ESTEEM Study

2024· article· en· W4405390476 on OpenAlexaff
Krupa Pandey, Kathryn Giles, Konstantin Balashov, Richard Macdonell, Jörg Windsheimer, Mikel Martínez, Ivan Božin, Stephanie Raynaud, Matthew Scaramozza, Oksana Mokliatchouk, Zhaonan Sun, Nicholas Belviso, Yayoi Sato, Xiaochen Lin, Annette Okai

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology and Therapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsCambridge Memorial Hospital
FundersBiogen
KeywordsMedicineDiscontinuationDimethyl fumarateAdverse effectConfidence intervalInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)Multiple sclerosisRate ratioPediatricsSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) has demonstrated a favorable benefit-risk profile in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) in clinical and real-world studies. The ESTEEM study (NCT02047097) was conducted to assess the long-term safety and effectiveness of delayed-release DMF in patients with relapsing forms of MS in routine clinical practice. We report final outcomes from ESTEEM with up to 6.5 years of follow-up. METHODS: Patients newly prescribed DMF were recruited from 393 sites globally. The primary objective was to assess the incidence and type of serious adverse events (SAEs) and adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation of DMF. Secondary objectives included assessment of DMF effectiveness on annualized relapse rate (ARR) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: Overall, 5124 patients received ≥ 1 dose of DMF. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) age at enrollment was 40.0 (11.2) years; 74% of patients were female. Patients received DMF for a mean (SD) duration of 31.0 (22.7) months. Primary reasons for discontinuation were AEs (n = 1237; 24%); the most common were gastrointestinal AEs (n = 469; 9%), blood and lymphatic disorders (n = 218; 4%), and vascular disorders (n = 200; 4%). SAEs occurred in 391 (8%) patients, most commonly infections and infestations (n = 102; 2%). Adjusted ARR declined by 90% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 90-91%; p < 0.0001), from 0.81 (95% CI 0.79-0.84) 12 months before enrollment to 0.08 (95% CI 0.08-0.09) 6 years after enrollment. The estimated proportion of patients free from confirmed disability progression sustained over 48 weeks was 87.0% at month 60. Mean scores for physical and psychological impact, fatigue, health, and productivity remained stable over 5 years. CONCLUSION: DMF demonstrated a safety profile in real-world clinical practice consistent with the known profile of DMF. Relapse rates were low and both ARR and PROs remained stable over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02047097.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology and TherapySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207