P511 Association of ustekinumab serum concentrations and clinical outcomes: results from the mUST-DECIDE trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Therapeutic drug monitoring is an important adjunct in optimising IBD management in patients treated with anti-TNF therapies. However, it remains unclear whether these principles apply to non-anti-TNF biologic therapies, such as the anti-IL12/23 agent, ustekinumab (UST). A follow-up analysis of the ‘mUST-DECIDE’ study explores the correlation between UST drug level and clinical outcomes. Methods 111 consecutive UST-treated adult CD patients across 11 sites in Canada from April 2017 to January 2018 were evaluated. Clinical decisions were recorded for all subjects at the single study visit and blood was drawn for TDM (Sanquin, radioimmunoassay). A retrospective chart review was completed in patients who had a follow-up visit ≥ 30 days after the baseline visit. Improved disease control (primary outcome) was defined as a composite assessment outcome meeting ≥ 1 disease control criterion (symptomatic, endoscopic/imaging, biochemical) without any of the non-response criteria (inadequate or loss of response, worsening of any disease control criteria, initiation of any CD-related medications and adverse events). Serum [UST] were categorised as therapeutic, subtherapeutic or uninterpretable based on their position in a 2 compartment PK model [subjects on Q8W dosing were assessed as per the log-linear model which projected a therapeutic level of ≥4.5 µg/ml at 4 weeks and ≥1.0 µg/ml at 8 weeks]. Results 53 patients had a clinical follow-up visit and an interpretable serum [UST]. Patients had refractory disease (89% anti-TNF-exposed, median 16.4 years since diagnosis), but clinically well (66% had baseline HBI <5) on treatment with UST for a median [IQR] of 16.5 [10.4–26.8] months. At baseline, the majority had serum [UST] in the therapeutic range (n = 44/53, 83%). After a median [IQR] of 148 [104–193] days, improved disease control was achieved by 51% of patients at next clinic visit. The outcome appeared independent of achieving therapeutic [UST] at baseline (OR[95% CI] = 0.80[0.19–3.38]). Dose-adjustment occurred in eight (15%) patients and improvements were observed in 75% of these patients. Subgroup analyses failed to detect clinical outcomes that were dependent on therapeutic serum [UST] (Table 1). No new safety signal was observed, no patient samples were positive for antibodies to UST. Conclusion The sub-study did not detect any association between routine serum [UST] and short-term clinical outcomes at the next patient visit. These data broadly suggests that the routine measurement of serum UST in CD patients does not aid in disease management, though further studies across different clinical scenarios (e.g. loss of response) are warranted.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".