MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989963371 · doi:10.1002/ibd.21159

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the oral interleukin-12/23 inhibitor apilimod mesylate for treatment of active Crohn's disease

2009· article· en· W1989963371 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce E. Sands, Eric Jacobson, Thomas Sylwestrowicz, Ziad Younes, Gerald W. Dryden, Richard N. Fedorak, Susan Greenbloom

Bibliographic record

VenueInflammatory Bowel Diseases · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsVale (Canada)St. Paul's HospitalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrohn's diseaseMedicineInternal medicineGastroenterologyPlaceboDouble blindRandomized controlled trialInterleukin 23MesylateDiseaseInterleukinCytokinePathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-12 (IL-12) and interleukin-23 (IL-23) are inflammatory cytokines linked to the Th-1 and Th-17 phenotypes associated with Crohn's disease (CD). We investigated the activity and safety of apilimod mesylate (formerly STA-5326), an oral IL-12 and IL-23 inhibitor, in patients with active CD. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, Phase 2, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy of apilimod mesylate in treating 220 adult patients with moderate-to-severe CD (Crohn's Disease Activity Index [CDAI] score 220-450). Patients were stratified according to C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and corticosteroid use and were randomly assigned to receive placebo or apilimod mesylate 50 mg daily or 100 mg daily. The study was divided into an induction phase (43 days) and a maintenance phase (125 days). The primary analysis involved a comparison of the proportion of patients experiencing clinical response, defined as at least a 100-point decrease in CDAI score from baseline at day 29. Data on adverse events were also collected. RESULTS: In all, 220 of the planned 282 patients were enrolled when the Data Monitoring Committee determined that the drug was not efficacious as a treatment and closed enrollment. A clinical response was experienced by 18 patients (24.7%) in the 50-mg daily (QD) group (n = 73) and 19 patients (25.7%) in the 100 mg QD group (n = 74), as compared with 21 patients (28.8%) in the placebo group (n = 73) on day 29 (P = 0.71 for each comparison). No significant adverse safety signal was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Apilimod was well-tolerated but did not demonstrate efficacy over placebo in patients with active CD.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations111
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInflammatory Bowel DiseasesSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207