MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S867 Ozanimod for Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis: Results From the North American Population During Induction and Maintenance in the Phase 3 True North Study

2021· article· en· W3209668838 on OpenAlexaff
David Hudesman, Millie D. Long, Douglas C. Wolf, Stephen B. Hanauer, Subrata Ghosh, AnnKatrin Petersen, Marc Pondel, Michael Silver, Raymond K. Cross, Brian G. Feagan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePopulationInternal medicineClinical endpointUlcerative colitisPlaceboClinical trialSurgeryDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: True North was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind (DB), placebo (PBO)-controlled trial conducted at 285 sites in 30 countries (NCT02435992). Treatment with once-daily ozanimod (an oral sphingosine 1-phosphate [S1P] receptor modulator selectively targeting S1P1 and S1P5) in patients (pts) with moderately-to-severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) showed significant improvements in primary and all key secondary endpoints. Here we report findings on the consistency of clinical and endoscopic endpoints in the global and North American population. Methods: In True North, pts received either DB treatment with ozanimod HCl 1 mg (equivalent to ozanimod 0.92 mg) or matching PBO, or open-label ozanimod 1 mg over a 10-week (wk) induction period. Pts with clinical response to ozanimod at wk 10 were re-randomized 1:1 to receive DB maintenance treatment with ozanimod 1 mg or PBO through wk 52. The primary endpoint was proportion of pts in clinical remission at wks 10 and 52; key secondary endpoints included clinical response and endoscopic improvement. The global population included 1012 pts who received at least 1 dose of study medication during induction, and 457 who received at least 1 dose of study medication during maintenance. Here, we examine results from pts in North American sites. Results: A total of 247 pts were enrolled in North America, of which 167 received DB ozanimod (n=107) or PBO (n=60) during induction. At baseline, 41.1% and 48.3% of pts in the ozanimod and PBO groups, respectively, had previously received a biologic treatment for UC. At wk 10, 15.9% and 3.3% of pts in the ozanimod and PBO groups, respectively, achieved clinical remission. In addition, greater proportions of pts achieved clinical response and endoscopic improvement with ozanimod at wk 10 (Table 1). During maintenance, 105 pts from North America were re-randomized to treatment with ozanimod (n=56) or PBO (n=49). At wk 52, 39.3% and 12.2% of pts in the ozanimod and PBO groups, respectively, achieved clinical remission, and greater proportions of pts achieved clinical response and endoscopic improvement with ozanimod (Table 1). These outcomes from the North American population are consistent with those previously reported from the global population. Conclusion: In this post-hoc analysis, consistent with the global population, ozanimod treatment for up to 52 wks in North American pts with moderately-to-severely active UC showed benefits on clinical and endoscopic endpoints.Table 1.: Efficacy Outcomes from the North American Participants in True North.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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 venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→