MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095281544 · doi:10.1182/blood-2020-140428

The Effect of Crizanlizumab on the Number of Days Requiring Opioid Use for Management of Pain Associated with Vaso-Occlusive Crises in Patients with Sickle Cell Disease: Results from the Sustain Trial

2020· article· en· W3095281544 on OpenAlexaff
Wally R. Smith, Kenneth I. Ataga, Santosh L. Saraf, Olufolake Adisa, Miranda Bailey, Nicholas Ramscar, Ashley Bonner, Stephen Brown, Laura Pastor

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsEVERSANA (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaso-occlusive crisisDosingOpioidEmergency departmentPlaceboDiseaseAcute painClinical trialAnesthesiaIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineInternal medicineSickle cell anemiaAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Vaso-occlusion is a hallmark feature of sickle cell disease (SCD) that promotes ischemia-reperfusion injury and leads to acute pain episodes, known as vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs). VOCs are disabling and frequently impact on the ability of the patient to attend work or school and participate in activities of daily living. VOCs are the primary reason for medical facility visits amongst SCD patients and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The acute pain of a VOC often requires parenteral opioid administration in hospital emergency departments and inpatient units. Patients are also frequently prescribed oral opioids to aid in home management of VOCs. The development of new SCD therapies that have been shown to reduce or prevent VOCs has generated interest in their potential as opioid sparing agents. This study evaluated the effect of crizanlizumab-a humanized monoclonal antibody indicated in the US for reduction of VOCs in SCD-on opioid use for managing VOC related pain. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis, subject-level data from the SUSTAIN (NCT01895361) trial were analyzed to determine the number of days of opioid use by patients in both the 5.0 mg/kg crizanlizumab and placebo arms during the 52-week follow-up period. Opioid use captured in case report forms was retrospectively assessed. Due to the common use of "as needed" (PRN) dosing for analgesics, a decision tree was developed in conjunction with clinical advice to guide classification of the opioid as being taken or not taken on a given day based on clinically plausible assumptions. Assumptions considered dose frequency (fixed vs. PRN), route of administration (parenteral vs. oral), and concomitant medications (anti-emetics and anti-histamines). Opioid record start dates, end dates, and dose frequencies were used to determine the number of unique days during the trial that each patient had taken at least one opioid. The annualized days with opioid use was calculated for each patient by dividing their number of unique days on opioids by their duration (days) in the trial. The distribution of annualized days with opioid use was compared between patients from the 5.0 mg/kg crizanlizumab and placebo arms. Mann-Whitney U tests with p-values were used to test differences between arms. A four-step analysis was planned to incorporate an increasing number of assumptions to define whether the opioid had been taken on a given day (see footnote of Table 1). Analyses were performed primarily in the per-protocol (PP) population considering all routes of administration and parenteral use only. Outcomes in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population were also assessed. RESULTS: The PP population included 40 patients in the 5.0 mg/kg crizanlizumab arm and 41 patients in the placebo arm. A comparison of the baseline demographics (age, sex, genotype, hydroxyurea use, crisis frequency, and opioid use) showed no statistically significant differences between the two arms. Results of the final step of each analysis are presented as the primary analysis (see Table 1); results of Step 1 were considered a sensitivity analysis (not shown). The median annualized days with opioid use in the PP population was lower in the crizanlizumab arm compared with the placebo arm (absolute reduction: 4.00 days; relative reduction: 57%; p=0.162). The median annualized days with parenteral opioid use was lower in the crizanlizumab arm compared with the placebo arm (absolute reduction: 2.01; relative reduction: 50%; p=0.047). Results in the ITT population (see Table 1) and for sensitivity analyses (not shown) showed similar trends of reduced annualized days with opioid use for patients in the crizanlizumab group compared to the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that crizanlizumab, compared with placebo, may reduce the annual number of days where opioids are used to manage pain from VOCs. Importantly, the benefit was observed for parenteral and oral opioids, demonstrating clinical and patient relevance. These findings are concordant with the tendency for crizanlizumab to reduce the number of VOCs experienced by SCD patients annually; the primary finding of the SUSTAIN trial. The reduction in opioid use with crizanlizumab requires exploration in future studies, but the findings of this study translate into positive clinical and patient-relevant outcomes beyond reducing the frequency of VOCs. Disclosures Smith: Shire: Research Funding; Imara: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy; Ironwood: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Incyte: Other: Investigator; Health Resources and Services Administration: Other: Investigator, Research Funding; Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: Other: Investigator, Research Funding; NHLBI: Research Funding; Shire, Inc.: Other: Investigator, Research Funding; Global Blood Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis, Inc.: Consultancy, Other: Investigator, Research Funding; Emmaeus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics, Inc.: Consultancy. Ataga:Bioverativ: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire/Takeda: Research Funding; Editas Medicine: Honoraria; Global Blood Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy; Modus Therapeutics: Honoraria; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Saraf:Global Blood Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory Boards, Speakers Bureau; Novartis, Global Blood Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer, Global Blood Therapeutics, Novartis: Research Funding. Adisa:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Current Employment. Bailey:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Current Employment. Ramscar:Novartis Pharma AG: Current Employment. Bonner:Eversana: Current Employment. Brown:Eversana: Current Employment. Pastor:Eversana: Current Employment.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207