MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P281 52-Week efficacy and safety of ixekizumab in r-axSpA/AS patients naïve to biologic treatments or with prior inadequate response/intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors

2020· article· en· W3019339134 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karl Gaffney, Daniel Aletaha, Mani Haschemi Nassab, Soy Liu Leage, Raphael Micheroli

Bibliographic record

VenueLara D. Veeken · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnkylosing spondylitisInternal medicinePlaceboEtanerceptGastroenterologyTumor necrosis factor alphaPhysical therapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Radiographic axial spondylitis (r-axSpA), or ankylosing spondylitis (AS), is a chronic inflammatory disease of the axial skeleton associated with serious pain, stiffness and limited flexibility, impairing quality of life. Two clinical trials demonstrated efficacy and safety of ixekizumab (IXE), a humanised anti-IL-17 IgG4 antibody, in r-axSpA/AS patients naïve to biologics, or with prior inadequate response/intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) over 16 weeks. This study assessed the treatment effect over 52 weeks. Additionally, the influence of baseline inflammation, measured by C-reactive protein (CRP) and/or spinal MRI on ASAS40 response at week 16 was investigated. Methods Data from two Phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trials, with patients who fulfilled the Assessment of Spondylo-Arthritis International Society (ASAS) criteria for AS and were either biologic-naïve (COAST-V, NCT02696785) or TNFi-experienced (COAST-W, NCT02696798), were analysed. We compared the proportion of patients achieving ASAS20/40, a 50% improvement of baseline Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI50) and assessed the change in spinal pain. Missing data was handled by using non-responder imputation for ASAS20/40 and BASDAI50 response rates and modified Baseline Observation Carried Forward (mBOCF) for spinal pain change from baseline. To investigate the influence of baseline inflammation on the efficacy, we examined the ASAS40 response at week 16 by baseline CRP (normal; ≤5 or elevated; >5 mg/L) and/or MRI Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) spine score (<2 or ≥ 2) using an integrated COAST-V/W dataset. Results At week 16, significantly more IXE than PBO-treated patients achieved ASAS20/40 and BASDAI50 and a decrease in spinal pain. Decreases in disease activity were maintained through week 52 (Table 1). These outcomes occurred in both biologic-naïve and TNFi-experienced patients. Safety outcomes were consistent with previous IXE studies. At week 16, in the integrated dataset, significantly more IXE than PBO-treated patients achieved ASAS40 response regardless of baseline CRP or MRI spine SPARCC score. Conclusion Through week 52, treatment with IXE resulted in sustained efficacy in biologic-naïve and TNFi-experienced AS patients with no unexpected safety signals. Furthermore, at week 16, IXE demonstrated efficacy (ASAS40) irrespective of baseline CRP levels or spinal MRI score. Disclosures K. Gaffney: Consultancies; Abbvie, Eli Lilly, UCB, Novartis. Member of speakers’ bureau; Eli Lilly, UCB, Novartis. Grants/research support; Abbvie, Pfizer. D. Aletaha: Member of speakers’ bureau; Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Medac, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Sanofi/Genzyme. Grants/research support; Abbvie, Novartis, Roche. A.J. Bradley: Corporate appointments; Eli Lilly employee. Shareholder/stock ownership; Eli Lilly. M.H. Nassab: Corporate appointments; Eli Lilly employee. S. Liu Leage: Corporate appointments; Eli Lilly employee. R. Micheroli: None.

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)0.002
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLara D. VeekenSame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207