Ulcerative colitis: patientsʼ perceptions compared with other chronic diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the efficacy of MMX mesalamine (LialdaTM [MezavantTM XL in the UK and Ireland; MezavantTM elsewhere]) a novel, high-strength (1.2g/tablet), oncedaily formulation of 5-ASA for the maintenance of remission of mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC). Patients with active, mild-to-moderate UC who had achieved clinical and endoscopic remission (defined as a modified UC Disease Activity Index score of ≤1, calculated as: scores of 0 for both rectal bleeding and stool frequency; a combined Physician's Global Assessment and sigmoidoscopy score of ≤1; no mucosal friability; and a sigmoidoscopy score reduction of ≥1 point from baseline) during studies evaluating MMX mesalamine for the induction of remission could subsequently enter an open-label extension study (SPD476-303) for the maintenance of remission, where they were randomized to MMX mesalamine 2.4g/day once daily (QD) or 1.2g twice daily (BID) for 12 months. Remission rates and relapse rates (defined as withdrawal from the study due to a requirement for alternative treatment for a UC exacerbation, including a dose increase or surgery) at 12 months are presented. In total, 362 patients in clinical and endoscopic remission entered the maintenance phase of whom 171 and 191 patients received MMX mesalamine 2.4g/day administered QD or BID, respectively. At month 12, 67.8 and 72.3% of patients in the QD and BID groups were in strictly defined clinical and endoscopic remission, respectively. At month 12, 88.7 and 92.5% of patients in the QD and BID groups, respectively, had not relapsed. During 12 months' MMX mesalamine therapy, less than 10% of patients experienced clinical relapse. Using stringent clinical and endoscopic criteria, more than two-thirds of patients remained in remission. These results indicate that MMX mesalamine is an effective maintenance therapy in UC.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".