DOP44 Long-term use of ozanimod in patients with moderately to severely active Ulcerative Colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Ozanimod was approved by the FDA to treat patients (pts) with moderately to severely active Ulcerative Colitis (UC) based on the results from the 52-week (wk) phase 3 True North (TN) study. We sought to evaluate long-term efficacy and safety of ozanimod. Methods We examined data from an interim analysis of pts in the TN parent study who entered the ongoing TN open-label extension (OLE). Pts entered the TN OLE from the phase 3 TN study if they were non-responders at the end of induction, lost response during maintenance, or completed maintenance treatment, or from the phase 2 Touchstone OLE if they remained at study closure and received once-daily oral ozanimod 0.92 mg (equivalent to ozanimod HCl 1 mg). Clinical remission, clinical response, endoscopic improvement, and corticosteroid (CS)-free remission were evaluated at Wks 46, 94, and 142 in the TN OLE for all pts who entered the OLE from the TN parent study, and in the subset of pts in clinical response at the OLE entry. The data were analysed in the intent-to-treat population using observed cases (OC), which used the number of pts remaining in the study at the corresponding time point, and non-responder imputation (NRI), which used the number of pts remaining in the study at the corresponding time point and those who withdrew before the time point but would have reached the time point if they had stayed. Treatment-emergent adverse events were evaluated from the pooled phase 2 and phase 3 UC studies. Results A total of 823 pts from TN entered the TN OLE; as of the cut-off date (Sept 30, 2020), 64% completed Wk 46, 34% completed Wk 94, and 14% completed Wk 142 of the OLE. The most common reason for discontinuation was lack of efficacy (21%). Baseline demographics were similar as in the TN study. A total of 261 pts were in clinical response at the time of OLE entry. OC analyses showed that the percentage of pts achieving clinical remission, clinical response, endoscopic improvement, and CS-free remission was maintained over time (Table). Efficacy in the responders was higher compared to the total population and was comparable within the endpoints at Wks 46 and 94. Using the more conservative NRI analysis, the proportion of pts achieving each endpoint was lower than in the OC; however, after 94 wks of OLE treatment, 34% of all pts and 55% of the responders still maintained clinical response. No new safety signals were seen with longer-term ozanimod use in the 1158 pts in the pooled population. Conclusion UC pts from the phase 3 TN study demonstrated maintenance of response with long-term ozanimod treatment. These data reflect approximately 2 years of additional ozanimod treatment, with no new safety signals identified.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".