P.064 MOXIe clinical trial overview of omaveloxolone for patients with Friedreich ataxia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We summarize the efficacy and safety data for omaveloxolone in patients with Friedreich ataxia from the MOXIe clinical trial (NCT02255435, EudraCT2015-002762-23) and post hoc analyses. Methods: In MOXIe Part 2, patients aged 16-40 were randomized 1:1 to receive omaveloxolone 150 mg or placebo. The primary outcome was change in modified Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale (mFARS) from baseline to Week 48—patients could roll over into an open-label extension (OLE). A post hoc propensity-matched analysis compared treated and untreated patients over 3 years. Results: Treatment with omaveloxolone significantly improved mFARS relative to placebo at Week 48, with a difference of -2.41 points for the full analysis set (n=82 [excluding severe pes cavus]; p=0.01) and -1.93 points for the all-randomized population (n=103 [including severe pes cavus]; p=0.03). Transient and reversible changes in aminotransferase levels were observed with omaveloxolone without other signs of liver injury. Headache, nausea, and fatigue were among the more common adverse drug reactions in omaveloxolone-treated patients. In a post hoc propensity-matched analysis, omaveloxolone-treated patients in the OLE progressed by 3 points at Year 3 versus 6.6 points in an untreated matched cohort. Conclusions: Patients who received omaveloxolone showed a significantly stabilized neurological function and slowing of FA progression, as measured by mFARS.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".