Trial reportJournal of neurology2026
TRICALS risk score augments but cannot replace neurofilament as a prognostic biomarker in ALS.
Trial report in Journal of neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurodegenerative disorder with substantial clinical heterogeneity, complicating the design and interpretation of clinical trials. Two strategies have been proposed to address this variability: phenotype-based prognostic modelling and biomarker-based stratification using neurofilaments. We aimed to determine whether a widely used phenotype-based method, the TRICALS risk score, could substitute for neurofilament biomarkers in a clinical trial.
methodsWe used data from the MIROCALS phase 2b randomised controlled trial of low-dose interleukin-2 in ALS (n = 220). The TRICALS risk score was calculated for each participant. The published biomarker model includes CSF phosphorylated neurofilament heavy chain (pNFH) and a pNFH × treatment interaction. We analysed the effects of replacing CSF pNFH with the TRICALS risk score and of adding TRICALS score as an additional covariate to the original model. Model performance was assessed using likelihood ratio χ
resultsTRICALS risk score was moderately correlated with CSF pNFH (r = 0.357), explaining 12.7% of shared variance. Substituting CSF pNFH with TRICALS score reduced model performance (- 2LL 928.25 vs 793.36). The TRICALS × treatment interaction was statistically significant (hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.96 p = 0.025), but contributed modestly to model fit (Δχ
conclusionsThe TRICALS risk score does not substitute for CSF neurofilament biomarkers as a prognostic or stratification variable but provides complementary information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.