MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3134476903 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab002.175

A177 METHOTREXATE FOR THE INDUCTION OF REMISSION IN ULCERATIVE COLITIS

2021· article· en· W3134476903 on OpenAlexaff
Darren Hudson, Ravi Lakhani, J MacDonald, Nilesh Chande, J.W.D. McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsCochraneWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUlcerative colitisMedicineMethotrexatePlaceboInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialInflammatory bowel diseaseClinical trialGastroenterologyDiseasePathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Obtaining steroid-free remission in Ulcerative Colitis (UC) is a clinically important parameter that can mitigate the development of disease-related complications and lead to improved quality of life. Aims A systematic review to assess the effects and safety of methotrexate for induction in patients with UC. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL were searched from inception to August 20, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing methotrexate with placebo or an active comparator in patients with active ulcerative colitis were considered for inclusion. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients who achieved clinical remission and withdrawal from steroids as defined by the studies and expressed as a percentage of the total number of patients randomized (intention-to-treat analysis). The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria. Results Three studies (n=212) were included in the review. Two studies were randomized controlled trials comparing methotrexate to placebo for induction of remission of active ulcerative colitis. The first study (n = 67) compared oral methotrexate (12.5 mg/week) to placebo. Forty-seven percent (14/30) of methotrexate patients achieved clinical remission and complete withdrawal from steroids during the study period compared to 49% (18/37) of placebo patients (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.59). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data. The second study (n=111) compared subcutaneous/intramuscular methotrexate 25 mg/week to placebo. The primary outcome, steroid-free remission at week 16, was present in 32% (19/60) of patients on methotrexate in comparison to 20%(10/51) of patients in the placebo arm (RR 1.62; 95% CI 0.83 to 3.15; P-value of 0.15). A GRADE analysis indicated downgrading of the evidence to low given very sparse data (29 events). An additional head-to-head randomised controlled study (n = 34) compared oral methotrexate (15 mg/week) to 6-mercaptopurine (1.5 mg/kg/day) and 5-aminosalicylic acid (3 g/day). This final study was judged to be at high risk of bias due to an open-label design. At 30 weeks, 58% (7/12) of methotrexate patients achieved clinical remission and withdrawal from steroids compared to 79% (11/14) of 6-mercaptopurine patients (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.29) and 25% (2/8) of 5-aminosalicylic acid patients (RR 2.33, 95% CI 0.64 to 8.49). GRADE analyses indicated that the overall quality of the evidence was very low due to very sparse data and high risk of bias. Conclusions Methotrexate demonstrated no benefit over placebo or active comparators for the induction of steroid-free remission. Future research is ongoing to explore the utility of combination therapy with monoclonal antibody biologic therapy for the treatment of active ulcerative colitis. Funding Agencies None

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0080.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→