MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S695 Risankizumab Induces Early Clinical Remission and Response in Patients With Moderate-To-Severe Crohn’s Disease: Results From the Phase 3 ADVANCE and MOTIVATE Studies

2021· article· en· W3210720681 on OpenAlexaff
Stefan Schreiber, Marc Ferrante, Remo Panaccione, Jean‐Frédéric Colombel, Tadakazu Hisamatsu, Allen Lim, James O. Lindsay, David T. Rubin, William J. Sandborn, Ezequiel Neimark, Alexandra Song, Xiaomei Liao, Feng Tian, Sofie Berg, Kori Wallace, Geert D’Haens

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrohn's diseaseInternal medicinePlaceboPopulationGastroenterologyClinical trialRandomized controlled trialDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Present therapies leave an unmet need for early and effective treatment for patients with Crohn’s disease (CD). Risankizumab (RZB), a humanized immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody against the p19 subunit of interleukin-23, was evaluated as an induction therapy to induce early clinical remission and response in patients with moderate-to-severe CD in two double-blind, randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled studies (ADVANCE [NCT03104413] and MOTIVATE [NCT03105128]). Methods: Patients with moderate-to-severe CD (CD Activity Index [CDAI] of 220–450, Simple Endoscopic Score for CD [SES-CD] ≥ 6 [≥ 4 for isolated ileal disease] excluding the narrowing component, and average daily [liquid/very soft] stool frequency [SF] ≥ 4 and/or average daily abdominal pain [AP] score ≥ 2) who had inadequate response or intolerance to conventional and/or biologic treatment (ADVANCE), or biologic treatment only (MOTIVATE) were randomised 2:2:1 (ADVANCE) or 1:1:1 (MOTIVATE) to receive intravenous RZB 600 mg, RZB 1200 mg, or PBO as induction therapy at weeks 0, 4, and 8. Clinical remission and clinical response were defined by either CDAI or a composite of SF and AP criteria, at weeks 4, 8, and 12 (endpoints defined in Figure 1 footnotes). Safety was assessed throughout the studies. Results: A total of 1419 patients from ADVANCE (N = 850) and MOTIVATE (N = 569) respectively, were randomised and included in the intention-to-treat population. In both studies, greater proportions of RZB- vs PBO-treated patients achieved clinical remission and clinical response per CDAI or SF/AP criteria starting at week 4 (P ≤ .05) and sustained through week 12 (P ≤ 0.001) (Figure 1). Treatment with RZB 600 mg or 1200 mg was well tolerated, and no new safety risks were identified. Conclusion: Induction therapy with both RZB 600 mg and 1200 mg intravenous resulted in significantly greater clinical remission and response vs PBO as early as week 4 and sustained through week 12 in patients with moderate-to-severe CD who had inadequate response or intolerance to conventional and/or biologic treatment.Figure 1.: Clinical Remission and Response Over Time *P ≤ .05, **P ≤ .01, ***P ≤ .001 vs PBO. Clinical remission per CDAI criterion: CDAI < 150 Clinical remission per SF/AP criteria: average daily SF ≤ 2.8 and not worse than baseline plus average daily AP score ≤ 1 and not worse than baseline. Clinical response per CDAI criterion: ≥ 100-point decrease from baseline in CDAI. Clinical response per SF/AP criteria: ≥ 30% decrease in average daily SF and/or ≥ 30% decrease in average daily AP and both not worse than baseline. AP, abdominal pain; CDAI, Crohn's Disease Activity Index; PBO, placebo; SF, stool frequency; RZB, risankizumab.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designRandomized 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→