Efficacy of Vedolizumab Induction and Maintenance Therapy in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis, Regardless of Prior Exposure to Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The efficacy and safety of vedolizumab, a humanized immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody against the integrin α4β7, were demonstrated in multicenter, phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trials in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn's disease. We analyzed data from 1 of these trials to determine the effects of vedolizumab therapy in patients with UC, based on past exposure to anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF) antagonists. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of data from the GEMINI 1 study, collected from 464 patients who received vedolizumab or placebo but had not received a previous TNF antagonist (naive to TNF antagonists) and 367 patients with an inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to TNF antagonists (failure of TNF antagonists). Predefined outcomes of GEMINI 1 were evaluated in these subpopulations. RESULTS: At Week 6, there were greater absolute differences in efficacy between vedolizumab and placebo in patients naive to TNF antagonists than patients with failure of TNF antagonists, although the risk ratios (RRs) for efficacy were similar for each group. Week 6 rates of response to vedolizumab and placebo were 53.1% and 26.3%, respectively, among patients naive to TNF antagonists (absolute difference, 26.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12.4-40.4; RR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3-3.0); these rates were 39.0% and 20.6%, respectively, in patients with failure of TNF antagonists (absolute difference, 18.1%; 95% CI, 2.8-33.5; RR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.2). During maintenance therapy, the absolute differences were similar but the RR for efficacy was higher for patients with failure of TNF antagonists than for patients naive to TNF antagonists, for most outcomes. Week 52 rates of remission with vedolizumab and placebo were 46.9% and 19.0%, respectively, in patients naive to TNF antagonists (absolute difference, 28.0%; 95% CI, 14.9-41.1; RR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-4.0) and 36.1% and 5.3%, respectively, in patients with failure of TNF antagonists (absolute difference, 29.5%; 95% CI, 12.8-46.1; RR, 6.6; 95% CI, 1.7-26.5). No differences in adverse events were observed among groups. CONCLUSIONS: Vedolizumab demonstrated significantly greater efficacy as induction and maintenance therapy for UC than placebo in patients naive to TNF antagonists and patients with TNF antagonist failure. There were numerically greater treatment differences at Week 6 among patients receiving vedolizumab who were naive to TNF antagonists than patients with TNF antagonist failure. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT00783718.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".