A prospective cohort study to determine the relationship between serum infliximab concentration and efficacy in patients with luminal Crohn's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with Crohn's disease (CD) may experience disease relapse on maintenance infliximab. Anti-drug antibodies likely contribute to loss of response, and serum infliximab levels likely correlate with efficacy. AIM: To prospectively evaluate the relationship between trough serum infliximab concentration and disease activity. METHODS: Adult patients (N = 327) with a diagnosis of CD who had received at least five consecutive infliximab infusions and who planned to receive at least two additional infusions were enrolled. The Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI), serum infliximab, C-reactive protein (CRP) and antibodies-to-infliximab (ATI) were assessed at baseline, week 4 and week 8. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis examined the relationship between infliximab concentrations and disease activity. RESULTS: The mean CDAI score, which decreased 1.05 points between infusions, did not correlate with the mean change in trough infliximab concentration (+0.39 μg/mL; r = 0.099, P = 0.083), but was associated with the mean change in CRP concentration (r = 0.19, P < 0.001). Trough infliximab concentrations below 2.8-4.6 μg/mL best predicted a ≥ 70 point increase in the CDAI between infusions, and those below 2.7-2.8 μg/mL best predicted CRP >5 mg/mL at the second infusion. ATI at either visit decreased the proportion of patients with therapeutic infliximab trough levels compared with patients who were ATI negative (17.5% vs. 77.3% at visit 1 and 13.8% vs. 75.6% at visit 3; P < 0.001 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study confirms the relationship between trough infliximab concentrations, inflammation and antibodies-to-infliximab. Infliximab trough concentrations below 3 μg/mL may increase the likelihood of symptoms and inflammation (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00676988).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".