A post-hoc analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To assess whether there is an association between degree of mucosal healing (MH) at wk 8 and clinical outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) in ACT1 and ACT2. MH at wk 8 was assessed using the Mayo endoscopic subscore classification (0-normal, 1-mild, 2-moderate, 3-severe disease). A post-hoc log-rank test was used to examine the distribution of time to colectomy through wk 54 across the 4 endoscopy subgroups for IFX and PBO-treated patients, respectively (ACT 1 and ACT 2 combined). The proportion of patients with corticosteroid-free (CS-F) status and CS-F symptomatic remission (stool frequency score of 0/1 and a rectal bleeding score of 0) were assessed at wk 30 (ACT 1 and ACT 2 combined) and at wk 54 (ACT 1). IFX patients who showed endoscopic improvement at wk 8 were less likely to progress to colectomy through wk 54 (Table; p = 0.0004). Small event numbers in PBO patients precluded a clear conclusion for PBO. Among those receiving corticosteroids prior to starting IFX-treatment, patients were more likely to be CS-F at wk 30 as their degree of MH improved at wk 8 (62% (0); 46% (1); 20% (2); 10% (3), p<0.0001). IFX patients with lower endoscopy scores at wk 8 were more likely to be in CS-F symptomatic remission at wk 30 (46% (0); 34% (1); 11% (2); 6.4% (3), p<0.0001). Similar trends in the attainment of a CS-F status and CS-F symptomatic remission were observed at wk 54 for IFX patients in ACT 1. Although a lower proportion of PBO patients became CS-F or achieved CS-F symptomatic remission vs IFX patients, similar trends of improved outcomes at wks 30 and 54 were associated with the degree of MH attained by PBO patients at wk 8.
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 | 0.017 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.081 | 0.007 |
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".