MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786636081 · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.12.039

Safety and Efficacy of Adalimumab in Patients with Noninfectious Uveitis in an Ongoing Open-Label Study: VISUAL III

2018· article· en· W2786636081 on OpenAlexaff
Eric B. Suhler, Alfredo Adán, Antoine P. Brézin, Éric Fortin, Hiroshi Gotô, Glenn J. Jaffe, Toshikatsu Kaburaki, Michal Kramer, Lyndell L. Lim, Cristina Muccioli, Quan Dong Nguyen, Joachim Van Calster, Luca Cimino, Martina Kron, Alexandra Song, Jianzhong Liu, Sophia Pathai, Anne Camez, Ariel Schlaen, Mirjam E. J. van Velthoven, Albert T. Vitale, Manfred Zierhut, Samir Tari, Andrew D. Dick

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Science, ICT and Future PlanningNational Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineAdalimumabUveitisVisual acuityInterim analysisOphthalmologyCorticosteroidPlaceboIntermediate uveitisAdverse effectTriamcinolone acetonideClinical trialSurgeryRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineAnterior uveitisDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of adalimumab in patients with noninfectious intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis. DESIGN: Phase 3, open-label, multicenter clinical trial extension (VISUAL III). PARTICIPANTS: Adults meeting treatment failure (TF) criteria or who completed VISUAL I or II (phase 3, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled) without TF. METHODS: Patients received adalimumab 40 mg every other week. Interim follow-up data were described from VISUAL III weeks 0 through 78. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disease quiescence, steroid-free quiescence, active inflammatory chorioretinal/retinal vascular lesions, anterior chamber cell grade, vitreous haze grade, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and corticosteroid dose. Binary data were reported using nonresponder imputation (NRI), continuous data using last observation carried forward and as-observed analysis, and corticosteroid dose using observed-case analysis. Adverse events (AEs) were reported from first adalimumab dose in VISUAL III through interim cutoff. RESULTS: Of 424 patients enrolled, 371 were included in intent-to-treat analysis. At study entry, 242 of 371 (65%) patients had active uveitis; 60% (145/242, NRI) achieved quiescence at week 78, and 66% (95/143, as-observed) of those were corticosteroid free. At study entry, 129 of 371 (35%) patients had inactive uveitis; 74% (96/129, NRI) achieved quiescence at week 78, and 93% (89/96, as-observed) of those were corticosteroid free. Inflammatory lesions, anterior chamber grade, and vitreous haze grade showed initial improvement followed by decline in patients with active uveitis and remained stable in patients with inactive uveitis. BCVA improved in patients with active uveitis from weeks 0 to 78 (0.27 to 0.14 logMAR; left and right eyes; as-observed) and remained stable in patients with inactive uveitis. Mean corticosteroid dose decreased from 13.6 mg/day (week 0) to 2.6 mg/day (week 78) in patients with active uveitis and remained stable in those with inactive uveitis (1.5-1.2 mg/day). AEs (424 events/100 patient-years) and serious AEs (16.5 events/100 patient-years) were comparable with previous VISUAL trials. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with active uveitis at study entry who received adalimumab therapy were likely to achieve quiescence, improve visual acuity, and reduce their daily uveitis-related systemic corticosteroid use. Most patients with inactive uveitis at study entry sustained quiescence without a systemic corticosteroid dose increase. No new safety signals were identified.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations198
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmologySame topicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s SyndromeFrench-language works237,207