MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200095169 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofab466.836

639. Time to Recurrence of <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> Infection (rCDI) is Rapid Following Completion of Standard of Care Antibiotics: Results from ECOSPOR-III, a Phase 3 Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trial of SER-109, an Investigational Microbiome Therapeutic

2021· article· en· W4200095169 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Louie, Matthew Sims, Richard Nathan, Steven O’Marro, Princy Kumar, Elaine E Wang, Robert L. Stevens, Kelly Brady, Barbara McGovern, Lisa Von Moltke

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboClinical endpointInternal medicinePopulationRandomizationDiscontinuationAntibioticsClostridium difficileRandomized controlled trialSurrogate endpointGastroenterologySurgeryMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The natural history of CDI recurrence after antibiotics may be helpful to understand the window of opportunity for microbiome repair. ECOSPOR III evaluated the efficacy of SER-109, an investigational microbiome therapeutic, compared to placebo with rates of rCDI as the primary endpoint. SER-109 was superior to placebo in reducing the rate of rCDI following standard-of-care antibiotics at 8 weeks (12.4% vs 39.8%, respectively; P &amp;lt; 0.001). Herein, we describe results from the secondary endpoint, time to recurrence, in this well-characterized study population. Methods A total of 182 C. difficile toxin+ adults with ≥ 3 CDI episodes and symptom resolution on CDI antibiotics were randomly assigned to SER-109 (4 capsules orally x 3 days) or placebo. Recurrence for this analysis was defined as ≥ 3 unformed stools/day for ≥ 48 hours, ± C. difficile stool toxin test, and an investigator decision to treat. Time to CDI recurrence was analyzed using observed data and Kaplan-Meier methods. Data were not imputed for subjects lost to follow-up or discontinued from study. Subjects who did not have a CDI recurrence were censored on the date of study completion, study discontinuation or death. Results Through 24 weeks, 11/89 (12.4%) SER-109 and 36/93 (38.7%) placebo subjects had rCDI (P &amp;lt; 0.001). Of all recurrence events in the study population, 16/47 (34.0%) were observed within 1 week; 30/47 (63.8%) within 2 weeks; and 34/47 (72.3%) within 4 weeks after randomization, highlighting the rapid onset of recurrence. On the other hand, 12/47 (25.5%) recurrences occurred between 4 and 12 weeks, highlighting late onset of recurrence in a subset of patients (Table). Significantly lower rates of recurrence in patients on SER-109 compared to placebo was maintained throughout the 24-week follow-up (Figure). Time of rCDI K-M Plot Conclusion SER-109, an investigational oral microbiome therapeutic, maintained significant efficacy in reducing rCDI vs placebo through 24 weeks. About two-thirds of all recurrences occurred within 14 days of antibiotic completion highlighting the need for rapid repair of the disrupted microbiome. However, the significant number of late recurrences in the placebo arm also highlights that rCDI trials limited to 4 weeks of follow-up after treatment completion may underestimate recurrences. Disclosures Thomas J. Louie, MD, Artugen (Advisor or Review Panel member)Crestone (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Da Volterra (Advisor or Review Panel member)Finch Therapeutics (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member)MGB Biopharma (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member)Rebiotix (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Seres Therapeutics (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Summit PLC (Grant/Research Support)Vedanta (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member) Matthew Sims, MD, PhD, Astra Zeneca (Independent Contractor)Diasorin Molecular (Independent Contractor)Epigenomics Inc (Independent Contractor)Finch (Independent Contractor)Genentech (Independent Contractor)Janssen Pharmaceuticals NV (Independent Contractor)Kinevant Sciences gmBH (Independent Contractor)Leonard-Meron Biosciences (Independent Contractor)Merck and Co (Independent Contractor)OpGen (Independent Contractor)Prenosis (Independent Contractor)Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc (Independent Contractor)Seres Therapeutics Inc (Independent Contractor)Shire (Independent Contractor)Summit Therapeutics (Independent Contractor) Richard Nathan, DO, none (Other Financial or Material Support, I am PI on several clinical trials. If you need that information, I would be happy to supply it.) Princy N. Kumar, MD, AMGEN (Other Financial or Material Support, Honoraria)Eli Lilly (Grant/Research Support)Gilead (Grant/Research Support, Shareholder, Other Financial or Material Support, Honoraria)GSK (Grant/Research Support, Shareholder, Other Financial or Material Support, Honoraria)Merck &amp; Co., Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Shareholder, Other Financial or Material Support, Honoraria) Elaine E. Wang, MD, Seres Therapeutics (Employee) Elaine E. Wang, MD, Seres Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder) Robert Stevens, PharmD, Seres Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder) Kelly Brady, MS, Seres Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder) Barbara McGovern, MD, Seres Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder) Lisa von Moltke, MD, Seres Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder)

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207