PTH-070 A Multinational Study to Determine Indicators of Suboptimal Therapy Among Ulcerative Colitis Patients Treated with Tumour Necrosis Factor Antagonists
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Ulcerative colitis (UC) patients treated with tumour necrosis factor antagonists (anti-TNFs) may require therapy changes over time, which may be considered as indicators of suboptimal therapy. Methods A multinational, multicentre, retrospective, chart review study was conducted to assess the indicators of suboptimal therapy among adult UC patients receiving their first anti-TNF [infliximab (IFX) or adalimumab (ADA)] between June 2009 and June 2013 (index therapy). The indicators of suboptimal therapy during 2 year follow up included: anti-TNF dose-escalation (assessed >4 months after index to allow for initial dose adjustments), augmentation with non-biologic therapy, UC-related surgery, discontinuation of first anti-TNF and switching to second anti-TNF. Dose escalation was defined as any increase in dose and/or frequency of the index anti-TNF agent(s). Augmentation was defined as starting a new non-biologic drug or increase in dose/frequency of the concurrent non-biological drugs with anti-TNF therapy. Discontinuation of index anti-TNF was based on entry in patients’ charts and excluded patients who discontinued anti-TNF despite it being effective during the follow-up period. Switch was defined as a subset of discontinuation patients who initiated another anti-TNF therapy over the follow-up period. The number and percentage of patients with each indicator and ≥1 indicator was summarised descriptively by country. Results The study included 538 UC patients with mean age (SD) of 42 (14) years. Forty-seven percent of patients were females and 73% reported moderate to severe UC at index. The percentages of patients on IFX and ADA as first anti-TNF were 92% and 8%, respectively. Overall, within 2 years, 61% of UC patients had ≥1 indicator of suboptimal therapy, 26% had anti-TNF dose escalation, 21% needed augmentation with non-biologic therapy, 9% underwent UC-related surgery and 29% discontinued their index anti-TNF. Of those who discontinued index anti-TNF (N = 156), 58% switched to another anti-TNF therapy. Conclusion In this large multinational cohort, more than 60% of UC patients had ≥1 indicator of suboptimal anti-TNF therapy. Predominant indicators included dose escalation and discontinuation of anti-TNF therapy. Disclosure of Interest J. Lindsay Grant/research support from: MSD, Abbvie, Hospira, Takeda, Janssen, Ferring, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Vifor Pharma, Atlantic Health care, Actavis (Warner Chilcott), and Tillotts, Consultant for: MSD, Abbvie, Hospira, Takeda, Janssen, Ferring, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Vifor Pharma, Atlantic Health care, Actavis (Warner Chilcott), and Tillotts, Speaker bureau with: MSD, Abbvie, Hospira, Takeda, Janssen, Ferring, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Vifor Pharma, Atlantic Health care, Actavis (Warner Chilcott), and Tillotts, J. Gisbert Grant/research support from: MSD, Abbvie, Hospira, Kern Pharma, Takeda, Janssen, Pfizer, Ferring, Faes Farma, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Falk Pharma, Chiesi, Casen Fleet, Gebro Pharma, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Vifor Pharma, Consultant for: MSD, Abbvie, Hospira, Kern Pharma, Takeda, Janssen, Pfizer, Ferring, Faes Farma, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Falk Pharma, Chiesi, Casen Fleet, Gebro Pharma, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Vifor Pharma, Speaker bureau with: MSD, Abbvie, Hospira, Kern Pharma, Takeda, Janssen, Pfizer, Ferring, Faes Farma, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Dr. Falk Pharma, Chiesi, Casen Fleet, Gebro Pharma, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Vifor Pharma, R. Mody Employee of: Takeda Pharmaceuticals International, Inc, L. Peyrin-Biroulet Consultant for: Abbvie, MSD, Jansse, Takeda, Hospira, Celltrion, Biogaran, Speaker bureau with: Abbvie, MSD, Janssen, Takeda, Mitsubishi, A. Armuzzi Grant/research support from: MSD, Consultant for: Abbvie, Hospira, Liily, MSD, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Sofar, Takeda, Speaker bureau with: Abbvie, Astra-Zeneca, Chiesi, Ferring, Hospira, MSD, Otsuka, Takeda, Zambon, B. Bokemeyer Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Ferring, UCB, Consultant for: Abbvie, MSD, Shire, Ferring, UCB, Hospira, Takeda, Movetis, Speaker bureau with: Abbvie, Ferring, MSD, Merckle, Falk, HLR, UCB, G. Nguyen Consultant for: Janssen and Abbvie, J. Siebenaler Conflict with: Employee of Mapi, a company hired to conduct the study by Takeda Pharmaceuticals International, Inc., Ö. Åkerborg Conflict with: Employee of Mapi, a company hired to conduct the study by Takeda Pharmaceuticals International, Inc., M. Smyth Employee of: Takeda Development Centre Europe Ltd, London, UK
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».