MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy and Safety of Certolizumab Pegol in patients with active Crohnʼs Disease who previously lost response or were intolerant to Infliximab: Open-Label induction results of the WELCOME Study

2008· article· en· W4252327710 on OpenAlexaff
Séverine Vermeire, María T. Abreu, Geert D’Haens, J.F. Colombel, Krassimir Mitchev, R Fedorak, Martina E. Spehlmann, Sujin Lee, W Sandborn, P. Rutgeerts

Bibliographic record

VenueInflammatory Bowel Diseases · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertolizumab pegolMedicineInfliximabClinical endpointInternal medicineMaintenance therapyCrohn's diseaseAdalimumabInterquartile rangeBristol-MyersOpen labelAdverse effectSurgeryGastroenterologyClinical trialTumor necrosis factor alphaDiseaseChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The availability of new anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α) agents has made it increasingly common for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) to switch therapies. Current guidelines, however, provide little indication of the expected outcomes of such a strategy. The purpose of this analysis was to assess Week 6 response rates to certolizumab pegol (CZP) in patients with CD who have responded to infliximab (IFX) but who are no longer responding or who have developed intolerability due to acute or delayed infusion reactions. WELCOME is Phase IIIb, multicenter, 26-Week open-label trial Evaluating the clinical benefit of certoLizumab pegol induCtiOn and Maintenance in patients suffering from CD with prior loss of response or intolErance to IFX. Two periods are defined: an open-label induction (CZP 400 mg, Weeks 0, 2, and 4) and a double-blind maintenance phase (CZP 400 mg, Weeks 6-24). Patients with a CD Activity Index (CDAI) score of 220-450 points and a history of IFX failure (any reason) were randomized to CZP 400 mg maintenance either every 2 or every 4 weeks from Week 6. Patients withdrawing (any reason) before Week 6 were considered to be nonresponders. Nonresponders at Week 6 were withdrawn. The primary endpoint was defined as the rate of response (decrease in CDAI score ≥ 100 points) at Week 6. Remission was defined as a CDAI score of ≤ 150 points. In total, 539 patients were enrolled. Median CDAI score at baseline was 293 points (interquartile range: 257.3-349.5). At Week 6, 62.2% (57.9-66.3) (intent-to-treat analysis) of patients achieved response and 39.3% (35.2-43.6) achieved remission. These rates were comparable to those in PRECiSE 2 (64.1% in the overall population and 53.9% in patients previously exposed to IFX),1 suggesting that prior IFX exposure may not reduce response to CZP induction. One-third of patients had responses by Week 2 (33.2%); at Week 4, 43.8% were responders. No new safety concerns were identified. Week-6 data from the WELCOME study indicate that the majority of patients with prior exposure to IFX respond to CZP. CZP is an additional treatment option in patients with CD who have had previous biologic exposure.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInflammatory Bowel DiseasesSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207