MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412166559 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2025.10172

D.7 Efgartigimod impact on I-RODS daily activity assessment in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy: post hoc analysis of Registrational ADHERE Study

2025· article· en· W4412166559 on OpenAlexaffvenue
JA Allen, Jie Lin, Mark Stettner, Ingemar S.J. Merkies, Jeff Guptill, Kelly Gwathmey, G Istas, A. De Roeck, Satoshi Kuwabara, Giuseppe Lauria, Luís Querol, N. Suresh, Chafic Karam, Thomas Skripuletz, Simon Rinaldi, Andoni Echaniz‐Laguna, Benjamin Van Hoorick, Ryo Yamasaki, Hans Katzberg, P. van Doorn, Richard A. Lewis, Zaeem A. Siddiqi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
Canadian institutionsWorkers Compensation Board of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathyPost-hoc analysisMedicinePost hocInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Efgartigimod, a human immunoglobulin (Ig)G1 antibody Fc fragment, blocks the neonatal Fc receptor, reducing IgGs involved in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), a rare, progressive, immune-mediated disease that can lead to irreversible disability. The multi-stage, double-blinded, placebo-controlled ADHERE (NCT04281472) trial assessed efgartigimod PH20 SC in participants with CIDP. Methods: Participants with active CIDP received open-label, weekly efgartigimod PH20 SC 1000 mg during ≤12-week run-in (stage-A). Responders were randomized (1:1) to weekly efgartigimod or placebo for ≤48 weeks (stage-B). This posthoc analysis evaluated changes from run-in baseline (study enrollment) to stage-B last assessment and items of the Inflammatory Rasch-built Overall Disability Scale (I-RODS). Results: Of 322 participants who entered stage-A, 221 were randomized and treated in stage-B, and 191/221 had data for run-in baseline and post–stage-B timepoints. Mean (SE) I-RODS change at stage-B last assessment vs run-in baseline was 5.7 (1.88) and -4.9 (1.82) in participants randomized to efgartigimod and placebo, respectively. 37/97 (38.1%) and 24/92 (26.1%) participants randomized to efgartigimod and placebo, respectively, experienced ≥4-point improvements in I-RODS score. Efgartigimod-treated participants improved ≥1 point in I-RODS items of clinical interest. Conclusions: Participants who received efgartigimod in stage-B experienced improvements in I-RODS score from study enrollment to stage-B last assessment.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicPeripheral Neuropathies and DisordersFrench-language works237,207