S857 Patient-Reported Outcomes of Response and Remission Following Guselkumab Induction Treatment as Measured by the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire: Results Through Week 12 of the Phase 2 GALAXI 1 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: GALAXI 1 is a phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of guselkumab (GUS), an IL-23 antagonist, for the treatment of patients (pts) with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease (CD) who had inadequate response or intolerance to conventional therapies (corticosteroid, immunosuppressant) and/or biologics (TNF antagonist, vedolizumab). Patient-reported outcomes from the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) through Week (Wk) 12 following GUS induction are reported here for the interim analysis population. Methods: Pts with moderate to severe CD (CDAI score 220-450) were randomized 1:1:1:1:1 to GUS 200, 600, or 1200mg IV at Wks 0, 4, 8; ustekinumab (UST) ∼6mg/kg IV at Wk 0 and 90mg SC at Wk 8; or placebo (PBO) IV. The IBDQ is a 32-item questionnaire with 4 dimensions: bowel symptoms, emotional function, systemic symptoms, and social function. IBDQ scores range from 32 to 224 with higher scores indicating better quality of life. IBDQ scores were evaluated at Wk 8 and Wk 12 for change from baseline, IBDQ response (defined as ≥16-point improvement from baseline), and IBDQ remission (defined as IBDQ score ≥170) for the GUS combined and PBO treatment groups. UST was a reference arm. Results: Two hundred fifty pts were evaluated; approximately 50% failed previous biologic therapy. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were generally similar across treatment groups. However, some differences were observed between the groups, the most notable of which included a slightly lower disease duration in the GUS 1200mg IV group (6.2 yrs) compared with the GUS 200mg IV group (11.7 yrs), and a lower mean baseline IBDQ total score in the PBO group (117.3) compared with the GUS combined and UST groups. IBDQ scores change from baseline at Wk 8 and Wk 12 are presented in Table 1. Mean change from baseline in total IBDQ and each of the 4 IBDQ domains was greater among pts in the combined GUS group compared with the PBO group. The proportion of pts who achieved IBDQ response at Wk 8 and Wk 12 was higher in the combined GUS treatment group compared with PBO (Figure 1). A similar trend was seen for IBDQ remission. Conclusion: In pts with moderately to severely active CD, pts treated with GUS (combined) induction therapy reported greater improvement in IBDQ scores compared with PBO as early as Wk 8. A higher proportion of pts treated with GUS compared with PBO achieved IBDQ response and remission at Wks 8 and 12, and this treatment benefit (as delta) increased from Wk 8 to Wk 12.Table 1.: Change from baseline in IBDQ total and domain scores, at Week 8 and Week 12.Figure 1.: IBDQ Response and IBDQ Remission at Week 8 and Week 12.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".