Effects of vedolizumab on health‐related quality of life in patients with ulcerative colitis: results from the randomised <scp>GEMINI</scp> 1 trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (HRQL) is often diminished in patients with ulcerative colitis. AIM: To evaluate the effects of vedolizumab on HRQL in patients with ulcerative colitis. METHODS: Using maintenance phase data from the GEMINI 1 study, an analysis of covariance model was used to calculate mean differences between the vedolizumab and placebo groups in changes from baseline to week 52 for 3 HRQL instruments: The Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and EQ-5D. Proportions of patients meeting minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds for changes on these instruments were compared between treatment groups for the overall population and for clinically important subgroups. Concordance between clinical remission and remission defined using IBDQ scores was examined. RESULTS: Compared with placebo-treated patients, vedolizumab-treated patients had greater improvements (152-201%) in IBDQ, EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS), and EQ-5D utility scores. Greater proportions (6.9-19.9%) of vedolizumab-treated patients than placebo-treated patients met MCID thresholds for all the instruments. Vedolizumab-treated patients with lower baseline disease activity and those without prior tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonist failure had greater HRQL improvements. Among 127 patients with clinical remission based on complete Mayo Clinic scores, >80% also had IBDQ remission; >70% of the 150 patients with IBDQ remission demonstrated clinical remission. CONCLUSIONS: Vedolizumab therapy was associated with significant improvements in HRQL measures compared with placebo. Benefits were greater in patients with lower disease activity and no prior TNF antagonist failure.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".