MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4207020757 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab232.671

P544 Patients with moderate to severe Crohn’s disease with and without prior biologic failure demonstrated improved clinical outcomes with risankizumab: Results from phase 3 induction and maintenance trials

2022· article· en· W4207020757 on OpenAlexaff
Geert D’Haens, M Beaton, Peter Bossuyt, Iris Dotan, Bruce E. Sands, Ken Sugimoto, Ezequiel Neimark, Alexandra Song, Kori Wallace, Qian Zhou, Kristina Kligys, Marc Ferrante

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMaintenance therapyInternal medicinePlaceboClinical trialPopulationRandomized controlled trialCrohn's diseasePhases of clinical researchGastroenterologyDiseaseChemotherapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Risankizumab (RZB), a selective interleukin-23 inhibitor, demonstrated superior efficacy over placebo (PBO) as induction and maintenance therapy in patients with moderate to severe Crohn’s disease (CD). Here we compared the efficacy and safety of RZB in inducing and maintaining clinical remission and clinical response in patients with CD who demonstrated intolerance and/or inadequate response (IR) to biologic therapies (with prior bio-failure) versus those who demonstrated IR to conventional therapies only (without prior bio-failure). Methods This subgroup analysis included pooled induction data from patients randomized to receive intravenous (IV) RZB 600mg (N=527) or placebo (PBO) IV (N=362) every 4 weeks (wks) for 12wks in the ADVANCE+MOTIVATE studies, and maintenance data from IV RZB responders who were randomized to subcutaneous (SC) RZB 360mg (N=141) or withdrawn from RZB to receive PBO SC (withdrawal [PBO SC], N=164) every 8wks for 52wks in FORTIFY. Clinical remission (per CDAI and per stool frequency [SF]/abdominal pain score [APS]), CDAI clinical response, enhanced SF/APS clinical response, and maintenance of clinical remission were evaluated in the overall population, and in subgroups with and without prior bio-failure, using non-responder imputation. Only descriptive statistics were used for the subpopulations (Endpoints are defined in Table footnotes). Safety was assessed throughout the studies. Results Approximately three-quarters of randomized patients included in the subgroup analyses had prior bio-failure (ADVANCE+MOTIVATE: 75.4%; FORTIFY: 73.8%). Among the subpopulations, numerically higher rates of clinical remission (CDAI and SF/APS), CDAI clinical response, and enhanced SF/APS clinical response were observed at the end of induction (wk12) among patients receiving RZB 600mg IV versus PBO IV (Figure); rates were numerically higher in the subpopulation without prior bio-failure than with prior bio-failure. FORTIFY Wk52 response rates for these endpoints, along with maintenance of clinical remission, were higher in the RZB 360mg SC arm compared to the withdrawal (PBO SC) arm in both subpopulations, with numerically higher rates observed for the subgroup without prior bio-failure (Figure). RZB maintenance treatment was well-tolerated and no new safety signals were observed. The safety profile of RZB has been reported previously.1,2 Conclusion Across the induction and maintenance studies, compared to PBO, RZB treatment led to greater clinical remission and clinical response in patients with CD independent of prior biologic experience. The subpopulation without prior bio-failure achieved higher rates of symptomatic remission.

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207