MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S0648 Clinically Adjusted vs Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Dosing Regimens With Adalimumab in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease: Results From the SERENE-CD Maintenance Study

2020· article· en· W3093534882 on OpenAlexaff
Silvio Danese, William J. Sandborn, Edward V. Loftus, Stephen B. Hanauer, Stefan Schreiber, Laurent Peyrin‐Biroulet, Remo Panaccione, Julián Panés, Filip Baert, Jean‐Frédéric Colombel, Marc Ferrante, Édouard Louis, Alessandro Armuzzi, Venkata Sasikiran Goteti, Nael M. Mostafa, Thao Doan, Joel Petersson, Anne Robinson, Alexandra Song, Geert D’Haens

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDosingTherapeutic drug monitoringAdalimumabMaintenance therapyInternal medicineMaintenance doseClinical trialDemographicsGastroenterologySurgeryPharmacokineticsDiseaseChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Adalimumab (ADA) is well-tolerated and effective in patients (pts) with Crohn's disease (CD).1,2 The Serene-CD phase 3 study evaluated higher vs standard dosing regimens of ADA 12-week (Wk) induction and 44Wk maintenance therapy in adults with moderate to severe CD. Outcomes of ADA maintenance therapy using clinically adjusted (CA) dosing or therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) were explored. METHODS: Safety and efficacy of CA and TDM maintenance regimens at Wk56 were assessed. Clinical responders (N = 184) completing Induction were re-randomized at Wk12 and assigned 1:1 to CA or TDM, both arms initially receiving 40 mg ADA every other wk (EOW). The CA arm could escalate to every wk (EW) based on CDAI (≥220) or high-sensitivity C reactive protein (hs-CRP, ≥10 mg/L). The TDM arm could escalate to EW at Wks 14, 28, or 42 if ADA serum concentration was < 5 µg/mL or 5–10 µg/mL with CDAI≥220 or hs-CRP≥10 mg/L. Once escalated, the pt remained at 40 mg EW. Key exploratory efficacy endpoints at Wk56 included clinical remission and endoscopic response and remission (Table 1). Safety was analyzed in pts receiving at least 1 dose of maintenance study drug. RESULTS: Of re-randomized pts, 76 (82.6%) CA and 79 (85.9%) TDM completed the study. BL characteristics/demographics were well-balanced between treatment arms. In CA and TDM arms, 26 (28.2%) and 36 (39.1%) pts escalated to EW dosing, respectively, with most in both groups escalating at Wk14 (13/26 CA, 21/36 TDM). No difference in proportion of pts achieving Wk56 clinical remission, steroid-free clinical remission among subjects taking corticosteroid at Induction BL, endoscopic response, endoscopic remission, or deep remission between CA vs TDM (Table 1) was found. No significant differences observed between the two groups for sustained clinical remission among Wk12 clinical remitters, or for maintenance of endoscopic response and remission among Wk12 responders and remitters respectively (Table 1). Dose escalation was driven by hs-CRP in CA arm and by serum drug levels in TDM arm. Observed safety profile was similar between groups; no new safety signals or unexpected trends were identified. CONCLUSION: Key efficacy endpoints indicate both CA and TDM maintenance regimens are similar as observed in the SERENE-CD maintenance study. Both dosing regimens were well-tolerated with a similar safety profile.3 TDM used for dose adjustment showed no clinical benefit over use of clinical symptoms and biomarkers alone.Table 1

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→