MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4206930755 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab232.444

P317 Ustekinumab Trough Concentrations Associated with Biochemical Outcomes in Patients with Crohn’s Disease

2022· article· en· W4206930755 on OpenAlexaff
Tessa Straatmijer, Vince Biemans, Dirk Jan A. R. Moes, Frank Hoentjen, Rob ter Heine, Jeroen Maljaars, Rosaline Theeuwen, Marieke Pierik, Marjolijn Duijvestein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFaecal calprotectinUstekinumabInternal medicineCrohn's diseaseTherapeutic drug monitoringGastroenterologyProspective cohort studyPopulationTrough levelPharmacokineticsCalprotectinDiseaseInflammatory bowel diseaseInfliximabTacrolimus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Ustekinumab (UST) is a monoclonal antibody which binds to the p40 subunit of interleukins-12/23 and is an effective and safe treatment for patients with Crohn’s disease (CD). An association between serum drug concentrations and therapeutic outcomes is required to justify Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM). However, it is currently unknown if TDM is of additional value in UST treatment. We assessed the exposure-biochemical response relationship of UST trough concentrations at week, 8 in a prospective, real-world setting. Methods We performed a prospective study in CD patients with biochemical, radiologic or endoscopic disease activity in four academic centers in the Netherlands. All patients (n=90) received weight adjusted intravenously (IV) UST induction. First subcutaneous (SC), 90 mg induction dose was administered at week, 8 followed by a maintenance dose of, 90 mg SC every, 8 or, 12 weeks, at the discretion of the physician. Blood for drug levels were drawn at different time points during follow up (median follow up was, 52 weeks (IQR, 50–52)) with a median amount of, 2 measurements (IQR, 1–4) per patient. Plasma concentrations of UST were determined by means of a validated enzyme-linked immune assay. A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed based on these measurements and the UST FDA review documents. Subsequently, the individual UST concentration time course during treatment were predicted using the developed model. Corticosteroid-free clinical remission (HBI ≤, 4) and biochemical remission (C-reactive protein (CRP) ≤5 mg/L or faecal calprotectin (FC) ≤, 250) were assessed at week, 12 and, 24. Quartile analysis and logistic regression was performed to analyse if UST concentration at week, 8 was associated with biochemical remission rates at week, 24. An independent cohort of, 34 patients was used to validate the primary outcomes. Results Basis characteristics of all patients are shown in table 1. Median estimated trough concentrations of UST were, 4.23 µg/mL (IQR, 2.79–5.83) and, 7.19 µg/mL (IQR, 3.30–10.67) at week, 8 in the primary and validation cohort respectively. Patients achieving biochemical remission at week, 12 and, 24 had statistically significantly higher UST levels at week, 8 (P<0.01) compared to patients without biochemical remission (fig, 1). Also, higher UST levels at week, 8 were associated with better biochemical remission rates at week, 12 and, 24 in quartile analysis and logistic regression (fig, 2,3). Associations of UST levels at week, 8 and biochemical remission at week, 12 and, 24 were confirmed in the validation cohort. No UST antibodies were detected. Conclusion In this real-world cohort of CD patients, ustekinumab levels of ≥5.9 µg/mL at week, 8 were associated with higher biochemical remission rates at week, 12 and, 24.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→