MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Durable Prevention of Recurrent C. Difficile Infection with RBX2660: Results of the PUNCH CD 2 Trial

2016· article· en· W2979124992 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mayur Ramesh, Sahil Khanna, Julie Messer, Matt Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboInternal medicineAntibioticsRandomized controlled trialSurgeryDiarrheaEnemaPost-hoc analysisGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Antibiotic treatment of C. difficile infection (CDI) with standard of care antibiotics is associated with high recurrence rates. Microbiota-based drugs have shown promise in durable prevention of CDI recurrence.1 We report on the durability of RBX2660 for the prevention of recurrent CDI in in a post-hoc analysis of PUNCH CD 2, a Phase 2b a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Methods: Patients enrolled in the PUNCH CD 2 trial were randomized to receive either: 2 doses of RBX2660 (a microbiota-based drug manufactured from live human-derived microbes); 2 doses of placebo; or 1 dose of RBX2660 and 1 dose of placebo via enema with doses 7 days apart. The placebo consisted of normal saline and cryoprotectant in the same proportions found in RBX2660. Success was measured as the absence of CDI symptoms at 8 weeks post treatment. Failures in any study group were eligible to receive open-label treatment with up to 2 doses of RBX2660. Failure was defined as recurrent C. difficile-associated diarrhea; positive CDI stool test; need for retreatment for CDI; no other cause for CDI symptoms. Patients will be followed to 24 months after completing the last treatment. Results: A total of 107 patients (median age 63, range: 18-92 years; 59.8% female) at 21 centers in the U.S. and Canada received at least 1 dose of RBX2660 with an overall success rate of 88.8% (95/107). Of these patients, 4.2% (4/95) developed a new episode of CDI confirmed by a positive test > 8 weeks after the last RBX2660 treatment. One episode occurred after the patient was treated with antibiotics for a dog bite; another during a hospital stay for small bowel obstruction; and 2 were of unknown origin. The long-term CDI-free rate (median follow-up: 8.3 months; range 1.6 to 14.9 months) was 95.8% (91/95), Table 1. The median time to a new CDI episode was 135, range: 61-259 days after treatment with RBX2660.Table 1: Durability of RBX2660 TreatmentConclusion: Recurrent CDI poses on-going treatment challenges with high recurrence rates after standard antibiotic treatment. RBX2660, a microbiota-based drug, was demonstrated as an efficacious treatment for recurrent CDI with long-term durability in both open-label and randomized controlled trials. Long-term follow-up is ongoing.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research→French-language works237,207→