Long-term outcome of maintenance infliximab therapy in children with Crohnʼs disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Infliximab therapy has short-term benefits in children with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease (CD). We assessed the long-term outcome of infliximab maintenance therapy in children with CD. METHODS: We performed a multicenter cohort study of 729 pediatric patients with CD enrolled in the Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease Collaborative Research Group Registry. Children younger than 16 years and newly diagnosed with CD were eligible for this study. Disease and medication information were collected prospectively from the treating physician at diagnosis, 30 days, and quarterly thereafter. No interventions were specified, per protocol. RESULTS: In all, 202 of 729 patients received infliximab: 62%, 23%, and 15% within 1, 1-2, and >2 years of diagnosis, respectively. The mean age at infliximab initiation was 12.7 years. A total of 158 infliximab-treated patients received maintenance therapy, 29 episodic (8 converted to maintenance), and 15 had incomplete follow-up. Among 128 patients administered maintenance infliximab and followed for >or=1 year, concomitant medications at infliximab initiation included corticosteroids (52%) and immunomodulators (90%). By 1, 2, and 3 years, <10% of patients continuing on maintenance infliximab were receiving corticosteroids (P < 0.001). Following maintenance therapy initiation, 26%, 44%, and 33% of patients continuing on maintenance infliximab over 0-1, 1-2, and 2-3 years, respectively, had clinically inactive disease not requiring corticosteroids or surgery. The likelihood of continuing maintenance infliximab at 1, 2, and 3 years was 93%, 78%, and 67%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Infliximab maintenance therapy was a durable and effective treatment that was associated with prolonged corticosteroid withdrawal over a 3-year period in children with 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 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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".