P062 DOSE ESCALATION WITH ORIGINATOR INFLIXIMAB OR COMBINATION THERAPY WITH ORIGINATOR INFLIXIMAB AND IMMUNOMODULATORS SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASES RISK FOR SERIOUS ADVERSE EVENTS IN PEDIATRIC IBD – THE DEVELOP EXPERIENCE
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
DEVELOP is a multicenter, prospective, observational registry of the long-term safety and clinical status of 6070 pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD; Crohn’s disease [CD], ulcerative colitis [UC], or indeterminate colitis [IC]) treated with originator infliximab (REM) and/or other medical therapies for IBD as part of routine clinical care. DEVELOP started in May 2007, is ongoing and has sites in the United States, Canada and in the EU (Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom). Our aim in this analysis was to examine how the risk and frequency of serious adverse events was affected by combination therapy with REM and immunomodulators as well as with dose escalation with REM. Physicians participating in the registry prescribe IBD treatments based on their usual clinical practice and standards of care. Patients are categorized into cohorts according to their prevalent or incident IBD medication exposure, including patients receiving therapy prior to enrollment and patients receiving therapy during registry follow-up. After the initial enrollment visit, data are obtained by the registry physician or designee every 6 months. The last data cut available, from June 30, 2018, assessed 29070 patient years (PY) of follow up. An overview of SAEs by REM monotherapy or REM/immunomodulator (IMM) combination therapy during the last follow-up interval is presented by diagnosis (all IBD, CD, UC, and IC) and by geographic region for CD patients (EU and NA) in Table 1. Overall, patients on REM and IMM had a significantly larger number of SAE’s (18.92 SAEs per 100 PY, 95% CI 14.57 to 24.16) compared to the REM monotherapy group (11.06 SAEs per 100 PY, 95% CI 8.89 to 13.59). The incidence of SAEs on REM monotherapy relative to REM/IMM combination therapy was numerically lower in each patient population (all IBD, CD, UC, and IC) and in CD patients from both geographic regions (EU and NA). In CD patients with at least 1 SAE, there was a statistically significant association between receiving > 5 mg/kg REM and having dose interval of < 8 weeks (Table 2). It should be noted that data on REM dose and frequency of administration were only available for exposure during participation in the registry, and not for exposure prior to enrollment into the registry. Combination therapy with REM and IMM was associated with statistically significantly more SAEs compared to REM monotherapy. CD patients with at least one SAE were more likely to be on more than 5 mg/kg and a dosing frequency of less than 8 weeks. Future analyses will examine potential effects of concomitant therapy, disease history and current disease activity on these results.
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 | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».