MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S772 Risankizumab Therapy Induces Improvements in Endoscopic Endpoints in Patients With Moderate-To-Severe Crohn’s Disease: Results From the Phase 3 ADVANCE and MOTIVATE Studies

2021· article· en· W3210899505 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Bossuyt, Marc Ferrante, Filip Baert, Silvio Danese, Brian G. Feagan, Edward V. Loftus, Julián Panés, Laurent Peyrin‐Biroulet, Zhihua Ran, Alessandro Armuzzi, Geert D’Haens, Alexandra Song, Ezequiel Neimark, Xiaomei Liao, Qian Zhou, Sofie Berg, Kori Wallace, Remo Panaccione

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicinePlaceboCrohn's diseaseGastroenterologyPopulationEndoscopyColonoscopyClinical endpointClinical trialRandomized controlled trialDiseaseSurgeryPathologyColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Endoscopic healing has become a critical treatment target in Crohn’s disease (CD). Risankizumab (RZB), a humanized immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody against the p19 subunit of interleukin 23, is being investigated as a treatment for moderate-to-severe CD. This analysis assessed different endoscopic endpoints in patients treated with RZB induction therapy in two double-blind, randomised, 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 demonstrated prior inadequate response or intolerance to conventional and/or biologic treatment (ADVANCE) or to biologic treatment (MOTIVATE) were randomised 2:2:1 (ADVANCE) or 1:1:1 (MOTIVATE) to receive intravenous (IV) RZB 600 mg, RZB 1200 mg, or PBO at weeks 0, 4, and 8. This analysis evaluated the proportion of patients who achieved endoscopic remission ulcer-free endoscopy (ie, absence of ulcers), and composite endpoints of CDAI clinical response and endoscopic response, and enhanced clinical response and endoscopic response at week 12 (endpoints defined in Figure 1 footnotes). All endoscopies were centrally read by a blinded reviewer. Safety was assessed throughout the studies. Results: In ADVANCE and MOTIVATE, 850 and 569 patients, respectively, were randomised and included in the intent-to-treat population for this analysis. At week 12 greater proportions of patients in both studies achieved endoscopic remission (P ≤ .001), ulcer-free endoscopy (P ≤ .001), CDAI clinical response and endoscopic response (P ≤ .001), and enhanced clinical response and endoscopic response (P ≤ .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 IV RZB 600 mg or 1200 mg resulted in improved outcomes at week 12 compared with PBO as assessed by endoscopy and by composite endoscopic-clinical endpoints in patients with moderate-to-severe CD.Figure 1.: Tofacitinib treatment sequence for pts in the delayed responder, retreatment responder, and dose escalation responder subpopulations. CR 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. Treatment failure was defined as an increase from OCTAVE Sustain baseline total Mayo score of ≥ 3 points, plus an increase in rectal bleeding subscore and endoscopic subscore of ≥ 1 point and an absolute endoscopic subscore ≥ 2 after at least 8 weeks of maintenance therapy. BID, twice daily; CR, clinical response; N, number of pts treated; pts, patients; Wk, Week.

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)0.004
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.250 · 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→