MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413361938 · doi:10.1177/22143602251366721

Association between exon-skipping therapy with eteplirsen and cardiac outcomes in Duchenne muscular dystrophy

2025· article· en· W4413361938 on OpenAlexaff
Joel Iff, Isabelle Desguerre, Yunjuan Liu, Francois Sarkozy, Edward Tuttle, Francesco Muntoni, Craig M. McDonald, Marie‐Christine Nouguès, Helge Amthor, Yi Zhong, Karim Wahbi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuromuscular Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsHealth Care Foundation
FundersSarepta Therapeutics
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) leads to dilated cardiomyopathy and heart failure during teenage years or young adulthood. Eteplirsen promotes dystrophin production through skipping of exon 51 of the DMD gene. Objective This analysis compared LVEF decline between eteplirsen-treated and control patients with exon 51 skip-amenable DMD. Methods Eteplirsen-treated patients from clinical trials were matched with control patients from natural history studies in a propensity score analysis. Risk of reaching LVEF thresholds (50%, 55%, and 60%) was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models. Annual rate of LVEF decline was characterised using linear mixed effects models. Results Among 141 eteplirsen-treated and 103 control patients available for matching, the analysis included 122 eteplirsen-treated patients matched with 122 control patients (64 unique control patients). No eteplirsen-treated and 27 controls (22.1%) reached LVEF <50%; eteplirsen-treated patients had a lower risk of reaching <55% and <60% thresholds versus controls (hazard ratio = 0.22; 95% CI = 0.07–0.66; P < 0.01 and hazard ratio = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.22–0.76; P < 0.01, respectively). Annual rate of LVEF decline for eteplirsen-treated and controls was −0.66% (95% CI = –0.96 to −0.36, P < 0.01) and −1.38% (95% CI = –1.60 to −1.16; P < 0.01), respectively. Results were consistent with a sensitivity analysis matching each eteplirsen-treated patient once with a unique control patient and with several tests for potential bias. Conclusions In this retrospective study, eteplirsen-treated patients were observed to have a significantly lower risk of reaching LVEF thresholds indicative of cardiac function decline and attenuation of LVEF decline compared with matched controls.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuromuscular DiseasesSame topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207