MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417002228 · doi:10.1136/lupus-2025-001876

New efforts to incorporate patient-reported outcomes into lupus clinical trials: report of the community meeting convened by the Lupus Accelerating Breakthroughs Consortium (Lupus ABC), 16–17 October 2024

2025· article· en· W4417002228 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia Katz, Anca Askanase, Nandan Baruah, Wen-Hung Chen, Lili Garrard, Meenakshi Jolly, Veronica Vargas Lupo, Judith Mills, Elektra J. Papadopoulos, Josephine Park, Zahi Touma, Nicole S. Cooper, Carla Menezes, Teodora Staeva, Hoang Nguyen, Cindy Coney, Carrie Eberspecher, Erika Reyna, Elizabeth Santa Cruz, Brian Ung, Narae Yun

Bibliographic record

VenueLupus Science & Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersChugai PharmaceuticalEMD SeronoAstraZeneca
KeywordsSystemic lupus erythematosusClinical trialAlternative medicineGeneral partnershipDrug developmentDiseaseAlliance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lupus Research Alliance formed the Lupus Accelerating Breakthroughs Consortium (Lupus ABC) in 2023 as a public-private partnership with investigators, pharmaceutical companies, the Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, patient-focused non-profits and professional societies with the goals of developing initiatives to accelerate lupus drug development in a precompetitive setting, and ensuring that perspectives of people with lived experience of lupus are included into the drug development process. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are a top area of focus for the Lupus ABC. To support future work in the area of PROs, a public meeting was held on 16-17 October 2024 with the objectives of (1) assessing the current state of PROs used in lupus clinical trials, (2) developing a roadmap to advance the use of PROs in lupus clinical trials and (3) identifying and setting priorities for efforts to be pursued by a Lupus ABC PRO Working Group. After a series of presentations, small groups addressed what PRO domains to measure, the questionnaire burden for trial participants, how PROs should be selected for trials and what efforts are needed to advance use of PROs in lupus clinical trials.Meeting participants concluded that although PROs are being collected in most lupus clinical trials, they may be underused as primary or secondary/exploratory endpoints. A strong desire to change the focus in trials from disease activity and signs to include PROs, as a way of highlighting patients' voices, was noted. The group concluded that the specific steps needed are to identify PRO measures appropriate for the target populations of interest, incorporate PROs into endpoints for regulatory decision-making, ensure PRO data are publicly available and accessible to researchers and involve people living with lupus in selection of PRO domains, measures and trial design. For these actions, collaborations among industry, researchers, regulators, payors and patients are needed.

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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.328 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLupus Science & MedicineSame topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchFrench-language works237,207