S771 Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib as Induction Therapy in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: Results From Phase 3 U-ACCOMPLISH Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: U-ACCOMPLISH is one of two phase 3 induction trials evaluating safety and efficacy of upadacitinib-45 mg once daily (UPA) in adults with ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods: U-ACCOMPLISH, a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT03653026), enrolled patients (pts) with moderate-to-severe UC (defined as adapted Mayo score 5–9 with centrally read endoscopic score of 2–3) who had inadequate response, loss of response, or intolerance to aminosalicylates, immunosuppressants, corticosteroids and/or biologics. Pts were randomized 2:1 to UPA or placebo (PBO) for 8 weeks (wks). At wk 8, responders entered the maintenance phase and non-responders entered the extended treatment period to receive open-label UPA for additional 8 wks. Primary endpoint (clinical remission per adapted Mayo Score) and ranked secondary endpoints including symptomatic, endoscopic–histologic evaluations from 8-wk PBO-controlled period are reported here. Non-responder imputation incorporating multiple imputation for missing data due to COVID-19 are reported. Results: 522 pts were randomized (UPA, n = 345; PBO, n = 177); intent-to-treat population included 341 pts in UPA and 174 pts in PBO group. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were similar between groups; 50.7% and 51.1% were biologic inadequate responders in UPA and PBO groups, respectively (Table 1). A significantly higher proportion of pts receiving UPA (33.5%) versus PBO (4.1%) achieved primary endpoint (adjusted treatment difference: 29.0% [23.2, 34.7]; P < 0.001). A significantly higher proportion of pts receiving UPA versus PBO also achieved all ranked secondary endpoints (all P < 0.001; Figure 1).Serious adverse events were reported by 3.2% and 4.5% of pts in UPA and PBO groups, respectively (Table 1). Similar rates of serious infection were observed in both groups (0.6%); 2 events each of herpes zoster and opportunistic infection were reported in UPA group. No active tuberculosis, malignancy, adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events, or deaths were reported. One pt with venous thromboembolism (deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) and 1 pt with gastrointestinal perforation were reported in the placebo group. Conclusion: UPA 45 mg QD induction treatment led to statistically significant improvements in clinical, endoscopic, and combined endoscopic-histologic endpoints. Treatment was well tolerated, and safety profile and AE prevalence were comparable with previous studies of UPA with no new safety signals identified.Figure 1.: Tofacitinib treatment sequence for pts in the responder subpopulation including responders/remitters and responder/non-remitter subpopulations. Six pts who responded to tofacitinib induction treatment received a dose of 15 mg BID. Clinical response was defined as a decrease from induction study baseline total Mayo score of ≥ 3 points and ≥ 30%, with a decrease in rectal bleeding subscore of ≥ 1 point or an absolute rectal bleeding subscore of 0 or 1. Remission was defined as a total Mayo score of ≤ 2, with no individual subscore > 1 and a rectal bleeding subscore of 0. BID, twice daily; N, number of pts treated; pts, patients; Wk, Week.Table 1.: Model Performance
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 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".