Predictors of Clinical Remission to Placebo in Clinical Trials of Crohn’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In placebo-controlled clinical trials for Crohn's disease (CD), some placebo-treated patients demonstrate improvement. However, it is unclear what factors contribute to placebo response and remission. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of 3 placebo-controlled clinical trial programs (GEMINI-2, UNITI-1/2, and CLASSIC-1) of moderate-severe CD evaluating the efficacy of vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and adalimumab. Baseline predictors of clinical remission at the end of induction (week 4/6), defined as Crohn's Disease Activity Index <150 were evaluated among placebo-treated patients. Clinical response (decrease in Crohn's Disease Activity Index ≥100 points from baseline) at the end of induction was also evaluated. Univariate analyses were performed and predictors with P < .10 were included in multivariable analyses. RESULTS: A total of 683 patients (148 from GEMINI-2, 470 from UNITI-1/2, and 65 from CLASSIC-1) treated with placebo were included. Of the predictors evaluated, C-reactive protein <5 mg/L (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.67; P = .035), albumin >40 g/L (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.05-2.93; P = .023), and disease duration <5 years (OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.05-2.75; P = .032) were included in the multivariable model for clinical remission. Disease duration <5 years was the only variable that retained significance on multivariable analysis (adjusted OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.02-2.73; P = .040). For clinical response, isolated ileal disease and disease duration <1 year were included in the multivariable model, of which only the latter retained significance (adjusted OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.04-3.24; P = .035). CONCLUSIONS: Strategies that reduce placebo response rates in clinical trials of CD should be considered, including stratification or exclusion of subjects by disease duration and mild disease severity as measured by objective biomarkers.
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 | 0.072 | 0.101 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".