MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982410008 · doi:10.1111/apt.15555

Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib dose de‐escalation and dose escalation for patients with ulcerative colitis: results from OCTAVE Open

2019· article· en· W2982410008 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce E. Sands, Alessandro Armuzzi, John K. Marshall, James O. Lindsay, William J. Sandborn, Silvio Danese, Julián Panés, Brian Bressler, Jean‐Frédéric Colombel, Nervin Lawendy, Eric S. Maller, Haiying Zhang, Gary Chan, Leonardo Salese, Konstantinos Tsilkos, Amy Marren, Chinyu Su

Bibliographic record

VenueAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersPfizer
KeywordsTofacitinibMedicineUlcerative colitisInternal medicineDosingAdverse effectMaintenance therapyOpen labelGastroenterologySurgeryChemotherapyRheumatoid arthritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: For patients with UC, flexible maintenance dosing therapy may confer advantages for safety, efficacy, costs and patient preference. Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule JAK inhibitor for the treatment of UC. AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib dose de-escalation and escalation in patients with UC. METHODS: We evaluated data (November 2017 data cut-off) from OCTAVE Open, an ongoing, open-label, long-term extension study. The dose de-escalation group comprised 66 tofacitinib induction responders in remission following 52 weeks' tofacitinib 10 mg b.d. maintenance therapy, subsequently de-escalated to 5 mg b.d. in OCTAVE Open. The dose escalation group comprised 57 tofacitinib induction responders who experienced treatment failure while receiving 5 mg b.d. maintenance therapy, subsequently escalated to 10 mg b.d. in OCTAVE Open. RESULTS: After tofacitinib de-escalation, 92.4% (61/66) and 84.1% (53/63) of patients maintained clinical response and 80.3% (53/66) and 74.6% (47/63) maintained remission, at months 2 and 12, respectively. After dose escalation, 57.9% (33/57) and 64.9% (37/57) of patients recaptured clinical response and 35.1% (20/57) and 49.1% (28/57) were in remission, at months 2 and 12, respectively. The incidence rate of herpes zoster with dose escalation (7.6 patients with events/100 patient-years) was numerically higher than in the overall tofacitinib UC programme. CONCLUSIONS: Following tofacitinib de-escalation in patients already in remission on 10 mg b.d., most maintained remission, although 25.4% lost remission, at month 12. For induction responders who dose-escalated following treatment failure on 5 mg b.d. maintenance therapy, 49.1% achieved remission by month 12. (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01470612).

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 score0.521
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations85
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlimentary Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207