Adalimumab sustains clinical remission and overall clinical benefit after 2 years of therapy for Crohn’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled CHARM trial, adalimumab was more effective than placebo in maintaining clinical remission for patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease (CD) through 56 weeks. AIM: To substantiate the long-term safety and clinical benefits of adalimumab through 2 years of therapy in CHARM and its open-label extension (ADHERE). METHODS: Patients entering ADHERE on blinded therapy received adalimumab 40 mg every other week (eow). Patients who had already moved to open-label adalimumab eow or weekly in CHARM continued their regimens. Data were analysed by originally randomized treatment group at CHARM baseline (adalimumab 40 mg eow, adalimumab 40 mg weekly, or placebo), regardless of whether patients entered ADHERE or received open-label adalimumab (eow or weekly). RESULTS: After up to 2 years of therapy, 37.6%, 41.9% and 49.8% of patients originally randomized to placebo, adalimumab eow and adalimumab weekly, respectively, were in clinical remission. All groups experienced sustained improvements on the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire. Decreasing hazard rates for both all-cause and CD-related hospitalizations were observed over time. Over a 2-year period, the rates of serious adverse events and malignancies (33.3 and 1.1 events/100-patient-years respectively) were similar to those observed during the overall adalimumab CD clinical development programme. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab demonstrated sustained maintenance of clinical remission, improvements in quality of life and reductions in hospitalization during long-term treatment for CD, with no new safety concerns identified.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".