Post-Induction High Adalimumab Drug Levels Predict Biological Remission at Week 24 in Patients With Crohn's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We investigated whether early adalimumab drug levels (ADL) at week 4 predicted biological remission at week 24. METHODS: In a prospective study, we assessed clinical and biological remission at weeks 0, 4, 12, and 24 after induction of adalimumab in 33 patients with Crohn's disease. Disease activity was determined by the Harvey-Bradshaw Index, ileocolonoscopy reports, cross-sectional imaging, C-reactive protein (CRP), and fecal calprotectin (FC) levels. Clinical remission was defined as Harvey-Bradshaw Index <5. Biological remission was defined as a combination of FC < 200 μg/g and CRP <5 μg/mL. ADL trough levels were tested using a liquid phase, mobility shift assay. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, 18/33 (55%) of the patients were with biological remission. Ten (30%) patients required dose escalation or withdrawal from adalimumab by week 24 because of lack of response and exhibited significantly higher FC (P = 0.003) and CRP (P = 0.002). ADL levels at week 4 (19.8 μg/mL vs 10.2 μg/mL, P = 0.001) were significantly higher in patients with biological remission vs nonresponders at week 24. ADL levels at week 4 were a good predictor of biological remission at week 24, with area under the curve 0.86, 95% confidence interval (1.1; 1.67) and for combined biological and clinical remission, with area under the curve 0.8. The best ADL cutoff at week 4 that predicted biological remission at week 24 was 13.9 μg/mL (sensitivity 94.4% and specificity 73.3%). DISCUSSION: In individuals with Crohn's disease, higher adalimumab drug levels at week 4 (>13.9 μg/mL) were significantly associated with biological remission at week 24.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".