MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PWE-228 An assessment of the impact 5ASA dose, dose interval, preparation and delivery have on maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis

2012· article· en· W2321540011 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John O'Kelly, Ian Arnott

Bibliographic record

VenueGut · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUlcerative colitisInternal medicineGastroenterologyConfidence intervalDosingMesalazineCohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction 5-Aminosalicylic Acid (5ASA) plays a key role in both induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis (UC). A number of questions remain poorly assessed by clinical trials including the role of dose, dose interval, preparation and delivery method in maintaining remission. We aimed to assess the value of preparation, dose, delivery method and dosing interval on the duration of first remission in patients with newly diagnosed UC. Methods We retrospectively assessed an inception cohort of 100 newly diagnosed UC patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2008 and followed-up for 3 years. 69 patients took oral Pentasa and 11 took oral Asacol. The diagnosis adhered to the criteria of Lennard-Jones and clinical details were categorised according to the Montréal classification. Data were also collected on 5ASA maintenance drug (Asacol or Pentasa), dose (high dose or low dose), and delivery (oral or oral and rectal). Relapse was defined as an increase in symptoms needing an increase in anti-inflammatory therapy. Risk of relapse was evaluated using HR, and by using Cox regression to control for potential confounders. Results From induction of remission to the end of our 3 yr follow-up, 76% of patients relapsed, with a mean time to relapse of 16 months. Mean daily dose taken of Asacol was 2.3 g/day (IQR 0 g/day) and Pentasa 2.4 g/day (IQR 2–3 g/day). We found no significant difference in the relapse rates between Asacol and Pentasa. (Relapse rate 7/11 Asacol vs 53/69 Pentesa, c 2 =0.574, HR 1.78 (p=0.19)). We also found no significant difference between: relapse rates for patients taking high dose 5ASA vs low dose. (Relapse rate 9/10 high dose vs 42/58 low dose, c 2 =0.114 HR 0.505 (p=0.223)); Oral and rectal vs oral alone (Relapse rate 10/12oral + rectal vs 59/77 oral, c 2 =0.374, HR 0.49 (p=0.09)); Twice daily and once daily (Relapse rate 44/60 TD vs 5/6 OD, c 2 =0.306, HR 2.12 (p=0.43)), and three times daily compared with twice daily (Relapse rate 20/23 TD vs 44/60 BD, c 2 =0.107, HR 0.82 (p=0.6)). Conclusion The duration of first remission in UC is variable and although 5ASA are effective the majority of patients will relapse within 3 years. These data demonstrate that relapse is influenced relatively little by high dose or bi-directional therapies and there were no differences in the preparations studied. This would indicate that concordance with therapy is a vital aspect of 5ASA efficacy and clinicians should reinforce this point when discussing therapy. Competing interests None declared.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.329 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGutSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207