A Multicentre, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel-Group Study to Evaluate the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of the S1P Receptor Agonist KRP203 in Patients with Moderately Active Refractory Ulcerative Colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: KRP203 is a potent oral agonist of the sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor subtype 1 that induces the sequestration of peripheral lymphocytes, thereby potentially reducing the number of activated lymphocytes circulating to the gastrointestinal tract. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, proof-of-concept study to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of KRP203 in patients with moderately active 5-aminosalicylate-refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1.2 mg KRP203 or placebo daily for 8 weeks. Primary efficacy variable was clinical remission, defined as partial Mayo Score 0-1 and modified Baron Score 0-1 with rectal bleeding subscore 0. RESULTS: KRP203 was safe and well tolerated overall. The most common adverse events (AEs) were gastrointestinal disorders and headache. Importantly, no KRP203-related cardiac AEs were reported. Total peripheral lymphocytes and selectively affected lymphocyte subtypes decreased, causing marked decreases in naive and central memory CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, and also in B cells. Clinical remission occurred in 2/14 (14%) patients under KRP203, compared with 0/8 (0%) under placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, KRP203 was safe and well tolerated by patients with UC. Importantly, no cardiac AEs were reported. Although KRP203 did not meet the minimum clinically relevant threshold for efficacy, the results may suggest that KRP203 treatment is superior to placebo. However, in this small study population, the difference was insignificant. Based on these data, studies with an improved design and a larger population should be considered.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".