MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4323351382 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac036.031

A31 MIRIKIZUMAB IMPROVES QUALITY OF LIFE IN MODERATELY-TO-SEVERELY ACTIVE UC: IMPROVEMENT IN IBDQ SCORES IN PARTICIPANTS OF LUCENT-1 AND LUCENT-2 RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED PHASE 3 TRIALS

2023· article· en· W4323351382 sur OpenAlexaff
B E Sands, B Feagan, Kristina A. Traxler, Nathan Morris, X Li, S Schreiber, Vipul Jairath, Alessandro Armuzzi, J. B. Jones

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueInflammatory Bowel Disease
Établissements canadiensDalhousie UniversityWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineMinimal clinically important differenceUlcerative colitisPlaceboInflammatory bowel diseaseRandomizationQuality of life (healthcare)Clinical trialMaintenance therapyCrohn's diseaseInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialSurgeryPhysical therapyDisease

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background The inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire (IBDQ) is a measure of health-related quality of life (QoL), with higher scores indicating greater QoL. In a prior phase 2 study (NCT02589665), mirikizumab, an anti-IL23p19 antibody, demonstrated efficacy and improvement in IBDQ scores in participants with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). Purpose This analysis evaluated effect of mirikizumab (miri) vs placebo (PBO) on IBDQ scores in patients (pts) with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) who had failed prior conventional or biologic therapy in a Phase 3, double-blind, 12-week (W) induction study (LUCENT-1) followed by a 40W maintenance study (LUCENT-2) for a total of 52W continuous therapy. Method Pts (N=1162) in LUCENT-1 were randomized 3:1 to receive 300mg miri or PBO intravenously once every four weeks (Q4W). 544 pts who achieved Modified Mayo Score Clinical Response to miri by W12 of induction were rerandomized 2:1 in LUCENT-2 to subcutaneous miri 200mg or PBO Q4W in maintenance period. Randomization was stratified by previous biologic therapy failure, baseline corticosteroid use, and region. LUCENT-1 stratification included baseline (BL) disease activity, and LUCENT-2 included LUCENT-1 clinical remission status. The least squares mean change from BL in IBDQ scores at W12 of induction and W40 of maintenance was determined using analysis of covariance models. BL was W0 of therapy and stratification factors and BL scores were used as covariates. The Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) was defined as an improvement of ≥16 points in total IBDQ score (IBDQ response) and IBDQ remission as a total score ≥170 points. IBDQ response and remission were calculated using non-responder imputations. Treatments were compared using the common risk difference (risk diff). Result(s) Miri treatment resulted in significantly greater improvement from BL in IBDQ total and domain scores vs PBO at both W12 of induction and W40 of maintenance (52W treatment) (Table). The proportions of pts who achieved an IBDQ response was significantly greater for miri treated pts vs PBO at W12 (risk diff =17.1[95%CI:10.7, 23.5]) and W40 (29.5 [21.0, 37.9]). Significantly greater proportions of pts receiving miri achieved IBDQ remission at W12 (18.1 [11.8, 24.4]) and W40 (28.5 [20.1, 37.0]) vs PBO (all evaluations and timepoints: p<0.001). Image Conclusion(s) Pts reported significantly greater improvements in IBDQ scores at induction and maintenance with miri compared to PBO. Over 75% of pts achieved a clinically meaningful improvement in QoL, as measured by IBDQ response, at the end of the 52 weeks of miri treatment. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below Other Please indicate your source of funding; Eli Lilly and Company Disclosure of Interest B. Sands Consultant of: Abivax, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Artugen Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bacainn Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Calibr, Celltrion, ClostraBio, Eli Lilly and Company, Enthera, Evommune, Galapagos NV, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Gossamer Bio, InDex Pharmaceuticals, Innovation Pharmaceuticals, Inotrem, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Kaleido Biosciences, Kallyope, MiroBio, Morphic Therapeutic, MRM Health, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus Therapeutics and Diagnostics, Protagonist Therapeutics, Q32 Bio, Surrozen, Takeda, Teva, TLL Pharmaceutical, USWM Enterprises, and Viela Bio, B. Feagan Shareholder of: Gossamer Bio, Consultant of: AbbVie, AdMIRx, AgomAb Therapeutics, Akebia Therapeutics, Alivio Therapeutics, Allakos, Amgen, Applied Molecular Transport, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Avir Pharma, Azora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, Connect BioPharma, Cytoki Pharma, Disc Medicine, Ecor1 Capital, Eli Lilly and Company, Equillium, Everest Clinical Research, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Galapagos NV, Galen/Atlantica, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Gossamer Bio, HotSpot Therapeutics, Imhotex, ImmuNext, InDex Pharmaceuticals, Intact Therapeutics, Janssen, Japan Tobacco, Kaleido Biosciences, Leadiant Biosciences, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, MiroBio, Morphic Therapeutics, Mylan, Novartis, OM Pharma, Origo Biopharma, Otsuka, Pandion Therapeutics, Pfizer, Progenity, Prometheus Therapeutics and Diagnostics, PTM Therapeutics, Q32 Bio, Rebiotix, RedHill, Biopharma, Redx Pharma, Sandoz, Sanofi, Seres Therapeutics, Surrozen, Takeda, Teva, Thelium Therapeutics, Theravance Biopharma, TiGenix, Tillotts Pharma AG, UCB Pharma, VHsquared, Viatris, Ysios Capital, and Zealand Pharma, T. Gibble Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, K. Traxler Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, N. Morris Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, X. Li Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, S. Schreiber Grant / Research support from: personal fees and/or travel support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Eli Lilly and Company, Dr. Falk Pharma, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos NV, Gilead Sciences, I-MAB Biopharma, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Protagonist Therapeutics, Provention Bio, Roche, Sandoz/Hexal, Shire, Takeda, Theravance Biopharma, and UCB Pharma, V. Jairath Consultant of: AbbVie, Alimentiv, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Asieris Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly and Company, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Flagship Pioneering, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos NV, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Pandion Therapeutics, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist Therapeutics, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Sandoz, Second Genome, Shire, Takeda, Teva, Topivert, Ventyx Biosciences, and Vividion Therapeutics, A. Armuzzi Consultant of: AbbVie, Allergan, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Eli Lilly and Company, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Galapagos NV, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Takeda, and TiGenix, J. Jones: None Declared

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,020

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,037
Tête enseignante GPT0,324
Écart entre enseignants0,287 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologyMême sujetInflammatory Bowel DiseaseTravaux en français237 207