MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Defining the Optimal Response Criteria for the Crohn's Disease Activity Index for Induction Studies in Patients With Mildly to Moderately Active Crohn's Disease

2008· article· en· W2018403303 on OpenAlexaff
Kelvin T. Thia, William J. Sandborn, James D. Lewis, Edward V. Loftus, Brian G. Feagan, A. Hillary Steinhart, Stephen B. Hanauer, Tore Persson, Bruce E. Sands

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai HospitalWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrohn's diseasePlaceboDiseaseInternal medicineClinical diseaseConcomitantClinical trialPhysical therapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) is used to judge efficacy in clinical trials. We explored the effect of CDAI response definitions for induction on study efficiency. METHODS: We analyzed primary CDAI data from induction studies in patients with mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease, not receiving concomitant aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, or immunomodulator therapy, and without fistulizing or stricturing complications. The 12 definitions of clinical response included: CDAI decrease from baseline by 50, 70, 100, or 150 points; decrease by 25% from baseline and by 70 or 100 points; CDAI <100 or 150 points; CDAI <150 points plus decrease by 70 or 100 points; CDAI <150 points at any time sustained for the duration of the trial; or decrease in the CDAI by 70 points for the last two consecutive visits. Response definitions were ranked according to ability to optimize the effect difference between treatment arms. The effect of time, baseline disease activity (CDAI 200-299 or > or =300 points), and previous surgical resections on response definitions were evaluated and ranked. Multivariate analysis on additional factors of age (<40 or > or =40 yr), gender and duration of disease (<2 or > or =2 yr) were performed to determine predictors of response when applied to these CDAI definitions. RESULTS: Treatment effect differences in placebo-controlled studies were maximized by response definitions that incorporated either a decrease CDAI > or =70 points for the last two consecutive visits or decrease in baseline CDAI > or =100 points, and remained optimal when evaluated for the composite effect of time, baseline activity, and prior resections. A decrease in baseline CDAI > or =100 points had some advantages over a decrease CDAI > or =70 points over two visits in terms of study efficiency, as it produced a lower control response rate and was not influenced by any of the baseline factors. CONCLUSION: Clinical trial efficiency for induction studies in patients with mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease can be improved by using either a decrease in CDAI by > or =70 points for the last two consecutive visits or a decrease in baseline CDAI by > or =100 points as the primary end point for the trial. These findings are valid for patients with ileocecal Crohn's disease not refractory to aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, immunomodulators, and biologics, and patients who do not have stricturing or penetrating complications. It is unclear if these CDAI response criteria would similarly increase study efficiency in trials that recruited patients with moderately to severely active disease, patients refractory to aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, immunomodulators, and biologics, and patients with stricturing or penetrating complications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.207
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.246
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2070.246
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations46
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of GastroenterologySame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207