MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417432454 · doi:10.1111/jdi.70193

Evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of <scp>ONO</scp> ‐2910 for the treatment of diabetic polyneuropathy: An early Phase <scp>IIa</scp> , multicenter, randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind study in Japanese patients

2025· article· en· W4417432454 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yukiko Onishi, Takeshi Osonoi, Norio Takahashi, Toru Takiguchi, Eiichiro Morishima, Yoshimasa Aso, Kenji Sekiguchi, Hideki Kamiya, Jiro Nakamura

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Diabetes Investigation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOno Pharmaceutical
KeywordsDiabetes mellitusPhase (matter)MEDLINEClinical trialPrimary care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: Diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) is common in patients with diabetes. Its symptoms include pain, numbness, and impaired neurosensory function. ONO-2910 promotes Schwann cell differentiation and is being developed for DPN. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This Phase IIa randomized controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness and safety of ONO-2910 in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes and DPN. Patients were randomized to ONO-2910 (300 mg/day) or placebo, once daily, for 12 weeks. The primary endpoints were the changes in the sum scores for numbness and tingling (modified Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Scores [mTCNS]) and safety. RESULTS: The ONO-2910 and placebo groups comprised 76 (safety: 77 patients) and 77 patients, respectively. The mean (standard deviation) age and time since DPN diagnosis were 62.6 (8.48) and 4.89 (5.662) years, respectively. The least-squares mean (LSM) change in mTCNS sum scores for numbness and tingling at 12 weeks was -1.0 in both groups (LSM difference: 0.0; 95% confidence interval -0.4 to 0.4). The LSM changes in the mTCNS total scores were -2.6 (0.64) and -2.3 (0.67) in the ONO-2910 and placebo groups, respectively. There were no marked changes in nerve function and nerve conduction velocities in the ONO-2910 and placebo groups. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 37 (48.1%) and 39 (50.6%) patients in the ONO-2910 and placebo groups, respectively. TEAEs in ≥2 patients in the ONO-2910 group were nasopharyngitis (5 patients), diarrhea (3 patients), nausea (2 patients), and eczema (2 patients). CONCLUSIONS: ONO-2910 was generally well-tolerated in Japanese patients with DPN. There were no obvious improvements in DPN symptoms or neurosensory function among patients who received ONO-2910 versus placebo. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: Japan Primary Registries Network jRCT2061210008.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Diabetes InvestigationSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207