High infliximab trough concentrations are associated with sustained histologic remission in inflammatory bowel disease: a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The threshold concentration of infliximab during maintenance therapy has not been well-defined in relation to histologic remission. The aim of the study is to dentify the maintenance-phase infliximab concentration associated with histologic remission in inflammatory bowel disease patients (IBD). METHODS: A prospective cohort study was carried out in 104 IBD patients seen at a tertiary care centre in London, Canada. Infliximab trough concentrations were collected during the maintenance phase of treatment and compared between participants with and without evidence of histologic remission. Participants were additionally evaluated for sustained histologic remission, and relapse to active disease. RESULTS: Participants in histologic remission attained higher mean concentrations of infliximab during the maintenance phase (10.34 ± 0.69 μg/ml) compared to those with persistent disease activity (6.23 ± 0.67 μg/ml, p-value < 0.0001). Additionally, during the maintenance phase, sustained histologic remission was also associated with a higher mean concentration of infliximab (10.81 ± 5.46 μg/ml) compared to those who relapsed to active disease (5.68 ± 3.70, p < 0.001). Overall, participants with a mean infliximab trough concentration greater than 8ug/ml were more likely to have histologic remission (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, AUROC = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.65-0.84, p < 0.0001) and sustained histologic remission (AUC = 0.77, 95%CI = 0.63-0.91, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Maintenance-phase infliximab trough concentrations greater than 8 μg/ml, which is higher than the currently recommended target concentration, are highly associated with histologic remission and sustained histologic remission.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".