Effects of concomitant immunomodulators on the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis who had failed conventional therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adalimumab is approved for use in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) who have not achieved disease control with conventional therapies including corticosteroids and/or immunomodulators (IMM). AIM: To analyse six studies that examined efficacy, pharmacokinetics and safety of combination IMM/adalimumab therapy, compared with adalimumab monotherapy in patients with inadequate disease control on conventional therapy. METHODS: Patients with moderate to severe CD or UC from randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were analysed. Adalimumab was added to background therapy; patients were categorised as receiving adalimumab monotherapy (CD induction, n = 245, maintenance, n = 185; UC induction, n = 213, maintenance, n = 157) or combination therapy (CD induction, n = 139, maintenance, n = 139; UC induction, n = 140, maintenance, n = 100) according to baseline immunomodulator use. Efficacy was reported for the intent-to-treat populations from each study, with remission defined as CD activity index <150 for CD and Mayo score ≤2 with no subscore >1 for UC. Safety was assessed via adverse events. RESULTS: The proportions of patients achieving remission were similar for adalimumab monotherapy and immunomodulator combination therapy in all studies. Median adalimumab concentrations at week 4 or 8 were numerically but not significantly higher with adalimumab combination therapy vs. monotherapy in the CD and UC studies respectively. Incidence and rate of adverse events was similar for adalimumab monotherapy and combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Post hoc analysis of six randomised, controlled trials demonstrated no efficacy benefits with immunomodulator/adalimumab combination therapy, compared with adalimumab monotherapy in CD and UC patients with inadequate disease control on conventional therapy; the safety of the two treatment approaches was comparable.
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".