Safety and Efficacy of Teduglutide in Pediatric Patients With Intestinal Failure due to Short Bowel Syndrome: A 24‐Week, Phase III Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of teduglutide in pediatric patients with short bowel syndrome-associated intestinal failure (SBS-IF). METHODS: A 24-week, phase III trial with 2 randomized, double-blind teduglutide dose groups and a nonblinded standard of care (SOC) arm was used; patients received 0.025 mg/kg or 0.05 mg/kg teduglutide once daily. Safety end points included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and growth parameters. The primary efficacy/pharmacodynamic end point was the number of patients who achieved a ≥20% reduction in parenteral support (PS) from baseline at week 24. RESULTS: All 59 enrolled patients completed the study (0.025 mg/kg, n = 24; 0.05 mg/kg, n = 26; SOC, n = 9). Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were comparable among groups. TEAEs were reported by 98% and 100% of patients in the teduglutide and SOC groups, respectively. The most common TEAEs in the teduglutide-treated groups were pyrexia and vomiting. The primary end point was achieved by 13 (54.2%), 18 (69.2%), and 1 (11.1%) patients who received 0.025 mg/kg teduglutide, 0.05 mg/kg teduglutide, and SOC, respectively (P < 0.05 vs SOC). Both 0.025-mg/kg and 0.05-mg/kg teduglutide groups showed clinically significant reductions in PS volume (P < 0.05 vs SOC), PS calories, days per week and hours per day of PS infusions, and increases in enteral nutrition and plasma citrulline at week 24 compared with baseline. Two (8.3%, 0.025 mg/kg teduglutide) and 3 patients (11.5%, 0.05 mg/kg teduglutide) achieved enteral autonomy. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of teduglutide was similar to that reported previously in children and adults. Treatment with teduglutide was associated with significant reductions in PS for pediatric patients with SBS-IF over 24 weeks.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".