Final Results from a Phase 2b Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of RBX2660: A Microbiota-Based Drug for the Prevention of Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Effective treatments for recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (rCDI) are urgently needed. RBX2660 is an investigational microbiota-based live biotherapeutic to reduce CDI recurrence following standard-of-care antibiotic treatment in individuals with rCDI. Here we report the final safety data through 24 months of follow-up as well as final efficacy data, reflecting alignment of the pre-specified statistical analysis plan definitions with the data presented. METHODS: The PUNCH CD2 clinical trial was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, three-arm phase 2b study conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of RBX2660 for the reduction of rCDI compared to placebo. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age and had at least three episodes of CDI and at least two rounds of standard antibiotic treatment or had at least two episodes of severe CDI resulting in hospitalization. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to group A, two doses of RBX2660; group B, two doses of placebo; or group C, one dose of RBX2660 and one dose of placebo; all administered 7 ± 2 days apart. Treatment success was prevention of recurrence, defined as absence of diarrhea and no re-treatment for CDI any time after the first dose until 8 weeks after the second dose of the study treatment. Safety was assessed by reports of adverse events and symptoms. The final efficacy and safety are reported for data available through 24 months. RESULTS: For the primary endpoint, treatment success at 8 weeks, 56.8% (25/45) of participants who received one dose of RBX2660 + one dose of placebo, 55.6% (25/45) of participants who received two doses of RBX2660, and 43.2% (19/44) of participants who received two doses of placebo in the final intention-to-treat (ITT) population were responders (both p = 0.2 vs placebo). In the per-protocol population, 87.5% (21/24) of participants who received one dose of RBX2660 + one dose of placebo and 58.1% (18/31) of those who received two doses of placebo had treatment success (p = 0.017; treatment difference, 29.4 [95% CI 7.6, 51.3]); 75.0% (21/28) of participants in the PP population who received two doses of RBX2660 were responders (p = 0.17 vs placebo). The safety profile of RBX2660, whether delivered as one or two doses, was similar to the placebo group. CONCLUSION: While the phase 2b PUNCH CD2 clinical trial did not meet its pre-defined primary endpoint of treatment success at 8 weeks after two doses of RBX2660 vs two doses of placebo, clinically meaningful data were obtained to justify proceeding with the single dose regimen in the phase 3 clinical trial, PUNCH CD3, now complete. To date, the cumulative data for RBX2660 demonstrate consistent efficacy and safety outcomes for reduction of CDI recurrence in adults. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02299570.
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 | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,002 |
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 ».