MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587668874 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjx002.551

P426 Supra-therapeutic infliximab levels are not associated with a higher risk of infection in IBD patients

2017· article· en· W2587668874 on OpenAlexaff
Tomer Greener, Boyko Kabakchiev, Mark S. Silverberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInfliximabInternal medicineCohortRetrospective cohort studyLogistic regressionAdverse effectGastroenterologyCohort studySurgeryTumor necrosis factor alpha

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Anti-TNF agents are associated with an increased risk of infection. Data evaluating the relationship between infliximab (IFX) concentration and toxicity are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency of adverse events (AEs) in IBD patients with supra-therapeutic (ST) IFX levels compared to those with “normal” range (NR) levels. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 180 patients with at least one measurement of serum IFX using a homogenous mobility shift assay (HMSA) assay (Prometheus Laboratories) from November 2012 through June 2016. The cohort was divided according to an IFX level cut-off of 15 μg/ml (ST and NR) levels). Frequencies of AEs including infections, skin manifestations and infusion reactions were compared between the 2 groups. A similar analysis was performed after dividing the patient cohort into 3 subgroups according to levels (<8/8–20/ >20). An “intra-individual” case series analysis was also performed comparing infection rates in patients with 2 reported levels, one in each range (NR and ST). Multivariate logistic regression was applied to assess factors associated with an increased risk for infection Results: Patients with ST levels did not have an increased rate of infections in comparison to patients with NR levels (12% vs 19%; p=0.3). Serious infections, opportunistic infections and skin manifestations were also similar between the 2 groups. Using the 3 subgroups determined by levels, infection rates were still comparable. Total AEs and infusion reactions were found to be significantly more common in the NR cohort (42% vs 21%; p<0.01 and 10% vs 1%; p<0.01, respectively). For the “intra-individual” analysis with 2 measured levels in the same subject, higher levels were not associated with an increased risk of infection. Disease activity, concomitant immunosuppression and steroids were not significantly associated with rates of infection. Table 1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with IFX levels lesser or greater than 15 μg/ml Table 2. Adverse effects in patient with lesser and greater levels than 15 μg/ml Conclusions: This is the first study to directly compare rates of infection in IBD patients exposed to high and NR levels of IFX. Higher IFX serum concentrations were not associated with higher rates of infections, even in patients exposed to very high levels. Clinicians and patients should be aware of the risks of AEs with IFX therapy but higher levels do not appear be associated with a higher than expected rate of adverse events.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207