S8 How Can We Predict the Development of Antibodies to Infliximab in Crohn’s Disease?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Anti-tumour necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) therapy is an effective treatment for the management of Crohn’s disease (CD). However, treatment failure is common. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of anti-TNF-α therapy failure. Methods: Retrospective single-center study including anti-TNF-α naïve patients with CD, who started on intravenous infliximab, between January 2019 and December 2021. Biochemical parameters included erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), c-reactive protein (CRP), faecal calprotectin, infliximab serum concentrations and the presence of antibodies to infliximab (ATI). Anti-TNF-α therapy failure was defined as the development of ATI at 6 and 12 months, absence of clinical response at 6 months, absence of clinical remission or absence of objective response at 12 months. Clinical response was defined as a reduction in Harvey-Bradshaw index (HBI) of ≥3 points comparing with initial value or HBI <5 points if initial HBI ≥7 points and clinical remission as HBI ≤4 points. Objective response was assessed by endoscopic studies, defined by improvement of mucosal inflammation and absence of deep ulcerations, or imaging, defined as improvement in bowel wall thickness, inflammatory fat, mural blood flow and hyper-enhancement. Results: A total of 53 CD patients were included, 30 were female (56.6%), with a mean age at the beginning of treatment of 39 ± 2 years. Considering the Montreal classification, 31 patients had ileal disease (58.5%), 7 colonic (13.2%) and 15 ileocolonic disease (28.3%); 22 patients had nonstricturing, nonpenetrating disease (41.5%), 22 stricturing (41.5%) and 9 penetrating disease (17.0%). Eleven patients had perianal disease (20.8%). A total of 26 patients (49.1%) were treated with combination of anti-TNF-α and immunomodulatory therapy (thiopurine or methotrexate). Anti-TNF-α therapy failure occurred in 21 patients (39.6%). At 6 months, the development of ATI occurred in 6 patients (11.3%) and absence of clinical response in 9 patients (17.0%). At 12 months, absence of clinical remission was seen in 13.6% of patients and absence of objective response in 27.0% of patients. At 6 months, the development of ATI was significantly higher in patients with lower infliximab serum concentrations at week 14 (with antibodies 5.9 ± 3.2 µg/mL vs without 14.3 ± 7.7 µg/mL, P < 0.001). Additionally, the development of ATI was significantly higher in patients with a higher initial value of ESR (with antibodies median 35 vs without median 13, P = 0.045). The infliximab serum concentrations at week 14 (AUC 0.828; P = 0.009; with sensitivity 0.833 and specificity 0.404 for values ≤11.6) and the initial value of ESR (AUC 0.754; P = 0.045; with sensitivity 0.833 and specificity 0.468 for values ≥15) had very good and good discriminative capacity, respectively, in predicting the development of ATI. No statistically significant differences were found in initial values of CRP and faecal calprotectin, between both groups. Moreover, the other definers of anti-TNF-α therapy failure were not associated with the combination with immunomodulatory therapy, infliximab serum concentrations at week 14 or initial values of ESR, CRP and faecal calprotectin. Conclusion(s): Infliximab serum concentration after induction therapy is the most important factor in the development of ATI, influencing treatment response, regardless of the combination of anti-TNF-α therapy with immunomodulatory therapy. A higher initial value of ESR can also predict the development of ATI.
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 | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,005 |
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 ».