MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236936284 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjw019.021

OP022. Efficacy and safety of oral tofacitinib for induction therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease: results of a Phase 2b randomised placebo-controlled trial

2016· article· en· W4236936284 on OpenAlexaff
Julián Panés, William J. Sandborn, S Schreiber, Bruce E. Sands, Séverine Vermeire, Gary Chan, Michele Moscariello, W Wang, Wojciech Niezychowski, Amy Marren, Paul J. Healey, Eric Maller, Kenji Watanabe, Masakazu Nishishita, Fumio Shimamoto, Takumi Fukuchi, Motohiro Esaki, Yasuharu Okamoto, Yuji Maehata, Shiro Oka, S Nishiyama, Shinji Fujii, Fumihito Hirai, Tomoyoshi Inoue, Nobuyuki Hida, R. Nozaki, Toshiharu Sakurai, Ken Takeuchi, Masayuki Saruta, Shôichi Saito, Yutaka Saito, Naoki Ohmiya, Hiroshi Kashida, Shinji Tanaka, Toshiyuki Matsui, Yasuo Suzuki, Yoichi Ajioka, Hisao Tajiri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTofacitinibMedicineCrohn's diseasePlaceboRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineInduction therapyDiseaseGastroenterologyAlternative medicineChemotherapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor that is being investigated for inflammatory bowel disease.Here we investigated the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg twice daily (BID) in maintaining response or remission in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease (CD).Methods: This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre Phase 2b maintenance study.Patients who completed the 8-week double-blind induction study with tofacitinib or placebo and achieved clinical response-100 (CD activity index] score ≥ 100 points decrease from baseline) or clinical remission (CDAI < 150) were rerandomised (1:1:1) to receive tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID or placebo for 26 weeks.Patients entering the induction study had moderate-to-severe CD (CDAI ≥ 220 to ≤ 450) and had failed prior therapy with ≥1 of corticosteroids, azathioprine/6 mercaptopurine, methotrexate, or tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Upon entry into the maintenance study, concomitant corticosteroids were tapered to 10 mg/day of prednisone equivalent.The primary endpoint was clinical response-100 or remission at week 26.Secondary endpoints included clinical response-100 and remission, serum C-reactive protein (CRP), and faecal calprotectin (FCP) levels.Patients were followed up for an additional 4 weeks after last dose for safety.Results: In the study, 180 patients were randomised, of which 128 had received tofacitinib in the induction study.The proportions of patients with clinical response-100 or remission at week 26 were 39.5% for tofacitinib 5 mg BID, 38.1% for placebo, and numerically higher with 10 mg BID (55.8%).At week 26, the change from maintenance baseline was significant (p < 0.0001) for CRP and FCP with 10 mg BID and significant for FCP (p < 0.05) with 5 mg BID, compared with placebo.There were 2 cases of non-serious herpes zoster with 10 mg BID, 1 intestinal perforation with 5 mg BID, and no deaths or malignancies.The proportions of adverse events (AEs) were similar across all groups.The most common AEs were in the gastrointestinal disorders and infections System Organ Classes, with higher observed rates of the latter with both tofacitinib doses than placebo.Conclusions: After 26 weeks of maintenance therapy, clinical response-100 or remission was observed in a higher proportion of patients receiving tofacitinib than placebo, though the difference was not statistically significant.Biomarkers supported a treatment effect with tofacitinib 10 mg BID.Tofacitinib appeared to be well tolerated.

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)0.003
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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