MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S0779 Effect of Ustekinumab Maintenance Therapy on Stool Frequency and Rectal Bleeding Through 2 Years in the UNIFI Phase 3 Study in Ulcerative Colitis

2020· article· en· W3094090325 on OpenAlexaff
María T. Abreu, Laurent Peyrin‐Biroulet, Silvio Danese, Colleen Marano, Yiying Zhou, Hongyan Zhang, Rupert W. Leong, David Rowbotham, Remo Panaccione, William J. Sandborn

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUstekinumabRandomizationUlcerative colitisMaintenance therapyInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologyIntention-to-treat analysisSurgeryChemotherapyDiseaseAdalimumab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The UNIFI randomized-withdrawal maintenance study evaluated the safety & efficacy of subcutaneous (SC) ustekinumab (UST) in patients (pts) with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) who had responded to intravenous (IV) UST induction. Pts who completed the maintenance study could enter a long-term extension (LTE) through 220 weeks (wks). We evaluated the effect of UST maintenance therapy on stool frequency & rectal bleeding through 92wks in pts who were treated in the LTE. METHODS: All pts who completed Wk44 were eligible to enter & continue in the LTE at the investigator’s discretion. PBO pts were discontinued from the LTE after maintenance study unblinding. During the LTE, pts were eligible to receive dose adjustment (PBO to q8w or q12w to q8w or q8w to q8w [sham dose adjustment]) starting at Wk56 based on investigator assessment of pts’ UC disease activity. Dose adjustment was considered part of the treatment experience & not considered a treatment failure for these analyses. Pts recorded the number of stools & rectal bleeding symptoms for 7 days before each visit. The proportions of pts with Mayo stool frequency subscores of 0 (normal number of stools) or 1 (1 to 2 stools more than normal) or rectal bleeding subscores of 0 (no blood seen) were evaluated. Absolute stool number was also summarized. RESULTS: Pts who were randomized & treated in the LTE were included in these analyses (UST 90 mg q12w: n = 141; UST 90 mg q8w: n = 143). Absolute stool numbers in the UST q12w and q8w groups were 6.6 and 6.5 stools per day, respectively, at induction baseline (BL) & decreased to 2.8 and 2.7, respectively, by maintenance BL. Reductions achieved at maintenance BL were maintained at Wk92 (2.7 & 2.2, respectively). At induction BL, only 12.8% & 18.2% of pts, respectively, had Mayo stool frequency subscores of 0 or 1. By maintenance BL, 80.9% & 80.4%, respectively, had Mayo stool frequency subscores of 0 or 1, & these percentages were maintained through Wk92 (79.4% & 86.7% at Wk92, respectively). At induction BL, 9.2% & 7.0%, respectively, had no blood seen in the stool. By maintenance BL, 87.2% & 84.6%, respectively, had no blood seen in the stool, & these percentages were maintained through Wk92 (86.5% & 88.8%). CONCLUSION: Among pts who were treated in the LTE, reductions in stool frequency & rectal bleeding that had been achieved after IV UST induction were maintained through 2 yrs of UST SC maintenance. These data support the durability of response to UST in UC.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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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