MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3166033910 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab073.125

DOP86 Corticosteroid-sparing effects of ustekinumab therapy for Ulcerative Colitis through 3 years: UNIFI long-term extension

2021· article· en· W3166033910 on OpenAlexaff
Ellen Scherl, David Rowbotham, Silvio Danese, William J. Sandborn, Yi Miao, H Zhang, María T. Abreu, Remo Panaccione, Waqqas Afif, Tadakazu Hisamatsu, Rupert W. Leong, Ramesh Arasaradnam, B E Sands, Colleen Marano

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUlcerative colitisMaintenance therapyPlaceboUstekinumabClinical endpointInternal medicineCorticosteroidColonoscopyRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologySurgeryDiseaseChemotherapyColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Ustekinumab (UST) is an IL12/23 blocker approved for use in Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis (UC). In the UNIFI maintenance study of patients (pts) with moderate-severe UC, >90% of the pts who achieved clinical response or remission at week (wk) 44 were able to eliminate corticosteroids, an important goal of therapy. In this analysis, we describe the corticosteroid-sparing effects of UST treatment through 3 years among pts who were treated in the UNIFI long-term extension (LTE). Methods 523 intravenous UST induction responders were randomized to SC maintenance therapy (SC placebo [PBO], n=175; UST 90mg every 12 wks [q12w], n=172; or UST 90mg q8w, n=176). 284 UST pts who completed wk44 entered the LTE. PBO pts were discontinued after wk44 unblinding. Based on the investigator’s clinical judgement of their UC disease activity, pts in the LTE were eligible to receive dose adjustment starting at wk56: PBO to q8w, q12w to q8w, and q8w to q8w (sham adjustment). Pts in PBO or q8w groups were only eligible for dose adjustment or sham dose adjustment before unblinding. Efficacy was evaluated in randomized pts using symptomatic remission (Mayo stool frequency subscore of 0 or 1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0). During the maintenance study, all pts receiving corticosteroids at maintenance baseline were required to initiate tapering. Through wk152 of the LTE, symptomatic remission endpoints were calculated with treatment failure and missing data nonresponder imputation, and dose adjustment was not considered to be a treatment failure. Missing corticosteroid dose data was managed using last observation carried forward. Results Of the 284 pts in the randomized population who were treated with UST in the LTE, 139 were receiving corticosteroids at maintenance baseline. Of these, 91.4% (n=127) were no longer receiving corticosteroids at wk152. The average prednisone-equivalent corticosteroid dose among pts receiving corticosteroids at maintenance baseline in the q8w group was 15.4 mg/day at maintenance baseline and 1.7 mg/day at wks44 & 152. In the q12w group, average prednisone-equivalent doses were 15.4, 1.0, and 4.6 mg/day, respectively (Table 1). Corticosteroid-free symptomatic remission rates through wk152 are summarized in Table 2. Results were similar for the q8w and q12w maintenance doses. Of the UST-treated pts who were in symptomatic remission at wk152, 94.6% (88/93) in the q12w group and 98.0% (97/99) in the q8w group were corticosteroid-free. Conclusion UST maintenance therapy, with both q8w and q12w dosing regimens, was effective in reducing and eliminating the use of corticosteroids in pts with UC through 3 years. Through 3 years of treatment with UST, the majority of pts in symptomatic remission were corticosteroid free.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→