The unfolding action model of initiation times, movement times, and movement paths

Converging evidence has led to a consensus in favor of computational models of behavior implementing continuous information flow and parallel processing between cognitive processing stages. Yet, such models still typically implement a discrete step between the last cognitive stage and motor implementation. This discrete step is implemented as a fixed decision bound that activation in the last cognitive stage needs to cross before action can be initiated. Such an implementation is questionable as it cannot account for two important features of behavior. First, it does not allow to select an action while withholding it until the moment is appropriate for executing it. Second, it cannot account for recent evidence that cognition is not confined prior to movement initiation, but consistently leaks into movement. To address these two features, we propose a novel neurocomputational model of cognitionaction interactions, namely the unfolding action model (UAM). Crucially, the model implements adaptive information flow between the last cognitive processing stage and motor implementation. We show that the UAM addresses the two abovementioned features. Empirically, the UAM accounts for traditional response time data, including positively skewed initiation time distribution, functionally fixed decision bounds and speed-accuracy trade-offs in button-press experimental designs. Moreover, it accounts for movement times, movement paths, and how they are influenced by cognitive-experimental manipulations. This move should close the current gap between abstract decision-making models and behavior observed in natural habitats.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Continuous track paths reveal additive evidence integration in multistep decision making

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Rationale and design of the RESOLVE trial: lanreotide as a volume reducing treatment for polycystic livers in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease

Contains fulltext : 109282.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: A large proportion of patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) suffers from polycystic liver disease. Symptoms arise when liver volume increases. The somatostatin analogue lanreotide has proven to reduce liver volume in patients with polycystic liver disease. However, this study also included patients with isolated polycystic liver disease (PCLD). The RESOLVE trial aims to assess the efficacy of lanreotide treatment in ADPKD patients with symptomatic polycystic livers. In this study we present the design of the RESOLVE trial. METHODS/DESIGN: This open-label clinical trial evaluates the effect of 6 months of lanreotide in ADPKD patients with symptomatic polycystic livers. Primary outcome is change in liver volume determined by computerised tomography-volumetry. Secondary outcomes are changes in total kidney volume, kidney intermediate volume and renal function. Furthermore, urinary (NGAL, alpha1-microglobulin, KIM-1, H-FABP, MCP-1) and serum (fibroblast growth factor 23) biomarkers associated with ADPKD disease severity are assessed to investigate whether these biomarkers predict treatment responses to lanreotide. Moreover, safety and tolerability of the drug in ADPKD patients will be assessed. DISCUSSION: We anticipate that lanreotide is an effective therapeutic option for ADPKD patients with symptomatic polycystic livers and that this trial aids in the identification of patient related factors that predict treatment response. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinical trials.gov NCT01354405

Predniso(lo)ne Dosage and Chance of Remission in Patients With Autoimmune Hepatitis

Background & Aims Patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) commonly receive induction therapy with predniso(lo)ne followed by maintenance therapy with azathioprine. European Association for Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines advise a predniso(lo)ne dose range of 0.50–1 mg/kg/day, which leaves room for practice variation. We performed a multicenter study to determine the efficacy of different dose ranges of predniso(lo)ne induction therapy in a large European cohort of patients with AIH. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study using a comparative effectiveness design. We collected data from 451 adults with AIH who began treatment from 1978 through 2017 at 9 centers in 5 European countries. We assigned patients to a high-dose group (initial predniso(lo)ne dose ≥0.50 mg/kg/day; n=281) or a low-dose group (<0.50 mg/kg/day; n=170). Logistic regression was performed to determine difference in outcomes between the groups. The primary outcome was normal serum levels of transaminases at 6 months after initiation of therapy. Results There was no significant difference in rates of normalization of transaminases between the high-dose predniso(lo)ne group and the low-dose group (70.5% vs 64.7%; P =.20). After multivariable logistic regression with correction for confounders, there was no difference in the likelihood of normalization of transaminases between the groups (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.78 – 1.87; P =.38). Patients given an initial high dose of predniso(lo)ne received more predniso(lo)ne over time than patients started on a lower dose (median doses over 6 months: 3780 mg vs 2573 mg) ( P <.01). Conclusions In a retrospective study of patients with AIH in Europe, we found that the dose of predniso(lo)ne to induce remission in patients with AIH is less relevant than assumed. An initial predniso(lo)ne dose below 0.50 mg/kg/day substantially decreases unnecessary exposure to predniso(lo)ne in patients with AIH

High discontinuation rate of azathioprine in autoimmune hepatitis, independent of time of treatment initiation

Contains fulltext : 225262.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Guidelines regarding treatment for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) favour two strategies for azathioprine (AZA) introduction: concurrent with steroids at induction or delayed by 2-4 weeks. The safety and efficacy of both strategies have been unexplored. METHODS: We established a cohort of 900 AIH patients from 12 centres in 7 European countries. There were 631 patients who used AZA as part of the therapeutic regimen. We distinguished two groups: patients with early AZA (<2 weeks) or delayed AZA initiation (≥2 weeks). Primary outcome was discontinuation of AZA in the first year of treatment. Cox regression and propensity score matching was performed to determine difference in outcomes between groups. RESULTS: Patients with early AZA initiation had significantly lower transaminases and bilirubin at baseline. Discontinuation rates of AZA did not differ between early and delayed starters (16.6% vs 14.2%), which did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.61-1.55, P = .90). Stratification according to baseline disease activity or propensity score matching did not alter the results. Main reason for AZA discontinuation was intolerance to treatment (14.0% vs 13.2%, P = .78) with nausea and vomiting as main side effects. AIH remission rates were comparable among groups. CONCLUSION: The discontinuation rate of AZA in AIH treatment is ~15% in the first year of treatment. Early or delayed AZA initiation does not differ in remission and discontinuation rates in AIH induction therapy. Our data suggest that either strategy may be used as part of AIH treatment

An open-label randomised-controlled trial of azathioprine vs. mycophenolate mofetil for the induction of remission in treatment-naive autoimmune hepatitis

Background &amp; Aims: Patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) almost invariably require lifelong immunosuppressive treatment. There is genuine concern about the efficacy and tolerability of the current standard combination therapy of prednisolone and azathioprine. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) has emerged as an alternative option. The aim of this study was to compare MMF to azathioprine as induction therapy for AIH. Methods: In this 24-week, prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre superiority trial, 70 patients with treatment-naive AIH received either MMF or azathioprine, both in combination with prednisolone. The primary endpoint was biochemical remission defined as normalisation of serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and IgG after 24 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints included safety and tolerability. Results: Seventy patients (mean 57.9 years [SD 14.0]; 72.9% female) were randomly assigned to the MMF plus prednisolone (n = 39) or azathioprine plus prednisolone (n = 31) group. The primary endpoint was met in 56.4% and 29.0% of patients assigned to the MMF group and the azathioprine group, respectively (difference, 27.4 percentage points; 95% CI 4.0 to 46.7; p = 0.022). The MMF group exhibited higher complete biochemical response rates at 6 months (72.2% vs. 32.3%; p = 0.004). No serious adverse events occurred in patients who received MMF (0%) but serious adverse events were reported in four patients who received azathioprine (12.9%) (p = 0.034). Two patients in the MMF group (5.1%) and eight patients in the azathioprine group (25.8%) discontinued treatment owing to adverse events or serious adverse events (p = 0.018). Conclusions: In patients with treatment-naive AIH, MMF with prednisolone led to a significantly higher rate of biochemical remission at 24 weeks compared to azathioprine combined with prednisolone. Azathioprine use was associated with more (serious) adverse events leading to cessation of treatment, suggesting superior tolerability of MMF. Impact and implications: This randomised-controlled trial directly compares azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil, both in combination with prednisolone, for the induction of biochemical remission in treatment-naive patients with autoimmune hepatitis. Achieving complete remission is desirable to prevent disease progression. Patients assigned to the mycophenolate mofetil group reached biochemical remission more often and experienced fewer adverse events. The findings in this trial may contribute to the re-evaluation of international guidelines for the standard of care in treatment-naive patients with autoimmune hepatitis. Trial registration number: #NCT02900443.</p

An open-label randomised-controlled trial of azathioprine vs. mycophenolate mofetil for the induction of remission in treatment-naive autoimmune hepatitis

Background &amp; Aims: Patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) almost invariably require lifelong immunosuppressive treatment. There is genuine concern about the efficacy and tolerability of the current standard combination therapy of prednisolone and azathioprine. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) has emerged as an alternative option. The aim of this study was to compare MMF to azathioprine as induction therapy for AIH. Methods: In this 24-week, prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre superiority trial, 70 patients with treatment-naive AIH received either MMF or azathioprine, both in combination with prednisolone. The primary endpoint was biochemical remission defined as normalisation of serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and IgG after 24 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints included safety and tolerability. Results: Seventy patients (mean 57.9 years [SD 14.0]; 72.9% female) were randomly assigned to the MMF plus prednisolone (n = 39) or azathioprine plus prednisolone (n = 31) group. The primary endpoint was met in 56.4% and 29.0% of patients assigned to the MMF group and the azathioprine group, respectively (difference, 27.4 percentage points; 95% CI 4.0 to 46.7; p = 0.022). The MMF group exhibited higher complete biochemical response rates at 6 months (72.2% vs. 32.3%; p = 0.004). No serious adverse events occurred in patients who received MMF (0%) but serious adverse events were reported in four patients who received azathioprine (12.9%) (p = 0.034). Two patients in the MMF group (5.1%) and eight patients in the azathioprine group (25.8%) discontinued treatment owing to adverse events or serious adverse events (p = 0.018). Conclusions: In patients with treatment-naive AIH, MMF with prednisolone led to a significantly higher rate of biochemical remission at 24 weeks compared to azathioprine combined with prednisolone. Azathioprine use was associated with more (serious) adverse events leading to cessation of treatment, suggesting superior tolerability of MMF. Impact and implications: This randomised-controlled trial directly compares azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil, both in combination with prednisolone, for the induction of biochemical remission in treatment-naive patients with autoimmune hepatitis. Achieving complete remission is desirable to prevent disease progression. Patients assigned to the mycophenolate mofetil group reached biochemical remission more often and experienced fewer adverse events. The findings in this trial may contribute to the re-evaluation of international guidelines for the standard of care in treatment-naive patients with autoimmune hepatitis. Trial registration number: #NCT02900443.</p