MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202626485 · doi:10.1111/apt.16626

Agreement between local and central reading of endoscopic disease activity in ulcerative colitis: results from the tofacitinib OCTAVE trials

2021· article· en· W3202626485 on OpenAlexaff
Brian G. Feagan, Reena Khanna, William J. Sandborn, Séverine Vermeire, Walter Reinisch, Chinyu Su, Leonardo Salese, Haiyun Fan, Jerome Paulissen, Deborah Woodworth, Wojciech Niezychowski, Bruce E. Sands

Bibliographic record

VenueAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsOctave (electronics)MedicineTofacitinibConfidence intervalOdds ratioInternal medicinePlaceboSurgeryGastroenterologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Endoscopy is routine in trials of ulcerative colitis therapies. AIM: To investigate agreement between central and local Mayo endoscopic subscore (MES) reads in the OCTAVE programme METHODS: Flexible sigmoidoscopy was performed in tofacitinib induction (OCTAVE Induction 1&2, NCT01465763 and NCT01458951), maintenance (OCTAVE Sustain, NCT01458574) and open-label, long-term extension (OCTAVE Open, NCT01470612) studies. Kappa statistics and Bowker's tests evaluated agreement/disagreement between centrally and locally read MES, with potential determinants of differences analysed by logistic regression. RESULTS: Moderate-to-substantial agreement was observed between central and local reads at screening (77.1% agreement; kappa 0.62 [95% confidence interval 0.59-0.66]), OCTAVE Induction 1&2 week (Wk) 8 (63.8%; 0.62 [0.59-0.66]), OCTAVE Sustain Wk 52 (55.6%; 0.56 [0.50-0.62]) and for induction non-responders at OCTAVE Open month 2 (59.9%; 0.54 [0.48-0.60]). Where disagreements occurred, local reads were systematically lower than central reads at OCTAVE Induction 1&2 Wk 8, OCTAVE Sustain Wk 52 and OCTAVE Open month 2 (Bowker's P < 0.0001); this difference was not observed at screening (P = 0.0852). Using multivariable logistic regression, geographical region, C-reactive protein (Wk 8), partial Mayo score (Wk 8) and prior tumour necrosis factor antagonist failure were associated with disparity at OCTAVE Induction 1&2 Wk 8 (P < 0.05). In OCTAVE Induction 1&2 and OCTAVE Sustain, significantly higher proportions of patients endoscopic improvement, remission and endoscopic remission with tofacitinib vs placebo, using either central or local reads. CONCLUSION: Moderate-to-substantial agreement was observed between central and local endoscopic reads. Where disagreements occurred, local reads were systematically lower than central reads at most timepoints, suggesting potential bias. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01465763, NCT01458951, NCT01458574, NCT01470612.

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)0.078
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0780.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlimentary Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207