DISCOntinuation of disease-modifying therapies in MS: The DISCOMS extension trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In the DISCOMS (DISCOntinuation of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) in multiple sclerosis (MS)) randomized clinical trial, we could not demonstrate that discontinuing MS DMTs in older, stable adults was not inferior to continuing DMTs. Relapses were rare in both groups, and most new disease activity was one to two new brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions unassociated with clinical changes. Objective/Aims: Describe results of the DISCOMS extension study. Methods: Among 10/19 of the original sites, we enrolled patients who completed DISCOMS; did not reach the primary endpoint during the original trial; and retained original randomized assignment. Participants completed one study visit and brain MRI at least 30 months after original enrollment in DISCOMS. Primary endpoint was time from entry into the primary study to relapse or new brain MRI activity. Results: Mean (SD) total follow-up was 40 (11.7) months. There were no relapses, and new brain MRI lesions (1/30 continuer, 2/44 discontinuers) were uncommon during the extension. Time from primary trial entry to disease event was significantly shorter for subjects in the discontinue group ( p = 0.043 from log-rank test). Conclusions: From entry into DISCOMS extension study, time to new MS activity remained shorter in discontinuers, but relapses were absent and new brain MRI lesions were rare.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".