Noradrenaline for progressive supranuclear palsy syndromes (NORAPS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover Phase IIb clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of oral atomoxetine for treating cognitive and behavioural changes in people with progressive supranuclear palsy syndromes in the UK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is a devastating neurodegenerative disease characterised by cognitive, behavioural and motor problems. Motor symptoms are highly disabling, while cognitive and behavioural changes have a major impact on carer burden, quality of life and prognosis. Apathy and impulsivity are very common, often coexistent in PSP, and negatively predict survival. In preclinical models and other diseases, apathy and impulsivity are associated with noradrenergic deficits, which can be severe in PSP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Noradrenaline for Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Syndromes trial is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design, Phase IIb clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral atomoxetine for the treatment of cognitive and behavioural changes in PSP. Participants receive atomoxetine 40 mg (10 mg/mL oral solution) once daily or a matched placebo solution, in random order, each for 8 weeks. An 'informant', who knows the patient with PSP well, is co-recruited to complete some of the trial outcome measures. Participants remain in the trial for 22 weeks after randomisation. The primary objectives are to assess (1) safety and tolerability and (2) efficacy versus placebo on challenging behaviours as reported in a subscale of the Cambridge Behavioural Inventory. Secondary and exploratory measures relate to cognition, the PSP Rating Scale, mood and potential baseline predictors of individual response to atomoxetine computed from imaging, genetic and cognitive measures at baseline. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial was approved by the South Central-Oxford B Research Ethics Committee (REC) and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (REC reference: 20/SC/0416). Dissemination will include publication in peer-reviewed journals, presentations at academic and public conferences and engagement with patients, the public, policymakers and practitioners. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN99462035; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN99462035; EudraCT (European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database)/CTIS (Clinical Trial Information System) number: 2019-004472-19; IRAS (Integrated Research Application System) number: 272063; Secondary identifying numbers: CPMS (Central Portfolio Management System) 44441.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".