MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311615005 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofac492.021

730. A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Ridinilazole Compared with Vancomycin for the Treatment of <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> Infection

2022· article· en· W4311615005 on OpenAlexaff
Pablo C. Okhuysen, Mayur Ramesh, Kevin W. Garey, Thomas Louie, Julián Torre Cisneros, Alena Stychneuskaya, Nino Kiknadze, Jianling LI, Esther Duperchy, Professor Mark H Wilcox, José G. Montoya, Lori Styles, Fong Clow, Danelle F. James, Erik R. Dubberke, Cláudia Murta de Oliveira, Christophe Van Steenkiste

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical endpointMedicineClostridium difficileMicrobiomeInternal medicineAdverse effectPopulationDiarrheaAntibioticsVancomycinClostridioidesRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologyMicrobiologyBiologyBacteriaBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Vancomycin (VAN) therapy for C. difficile infection (CDI) is effective with &amp;gt; 80% clinical response (CR) but is associated with 20–30% recurrence rate (rCDI). Secondary bile acids (2° BAs) inhibit C. difficile germination and help prevent rCDI. VAN depletes the gut microbiome decreasing the conversion of primary bile acids to 2° BAs. Ridinilazole (RDZ) is a highly selective anti-CDI, DNA-binding antibiotic in development for the treatment of CDI and prevention of rCDI. Methods A global, double-blinded, randomized Phase 3 trial assessed a 10-day treatment with RDZ 200 mg BID vs VAN 125 mg QID for CDI. The primary endpoint was sustained clinical response (SCR) defined as CR and no rCDI through 30 days post-end of treatment (EOT). Other endpoints included rCDI, microbiome diversity and composition, and microbiome-derived 2° BAs concentration. rCDI was defined as a new episode of diarrhea with confirmed positive free toxin test (FTT), requiring additional CDI therapy. All participants were monitored for treatment emergent adverse events (TEAE). Results Of the 759 patients (pts) enrolled, 745 were included in the mITT population (RDZ n=370, VAN n=375). RDZ achieved a numerically higher SCR rate than VAN (73.0% vs 70.7%) p=0.4672. RDZ resulted in a significant reduction in rCDI rate (8.1% vs 17.3%, p=0.0002) (Fig 1). In a pre-specified subpopulation, this was most notable in pts not receiving other antibiotics (rCDI 6.7% in RDZ vs 16.5% in VAN, p=0.0005). Microbiome alpha diversity was higher for RDZ vs VAN at EOT and EOT+30d (p&amp;lt; 0.0001 and p≤ 0.0007 respectively, Fig 2) as were relative abundance (p&amp;lt; 0.0001 and p=0.0203 respectively), and concentrations of 2° BAs (Fig 3). Higher microbiome diversity and concentrations of 2° BAs at EOT were associated with both lower rCDI and higher SCR rates. RDZ was well tolerated (pts with ≥ 1 TEAE: RDZ 36.4% vs VAN 35.5%, treatment discontinuation due to TEAE: RDZ 0.8% vs. VAN 2.9%). Conclusion RDZ was effective for sustained clinical response and safe for the treatment of patients with CDI. This was most notable in pts not receiving antibiotics. Compared to VAN, RDZ patients had faster recovery of fecal 2° BA, consistent with the preservation of microbiome diversity, resulting in a significantly lower rate of rCDI. Disclosures Pablo C. Okhuysen, MD, AstraZeneca: Stocks/Bonds|Beam Therapeutics: Stocks/Bonds|Biontech: Stocks/Bonds|Deinove: Grant/Research Support|Ferring: Advisor/Consultant|Glaxo Smith Kleine: Stocks/Bonds|Johnson and Johnson: Stocks/Bonds|Melinta: Grant/Research Support|Merck Sharp &amp; Dohme Corp: Grant/Research Support|Moderna: Stocks/Bonds|Napo Pharmaceuticals: Advisor/Consultant|Napo Pharmaceuticals: Grant/Research Support|Novavax: Stocks/Bonds|Pfizer: Stocks/Bonds|Summit: Advisor/Consultant|Summit: Grant/Research Support Kevin W. Garey, PharmD, MS, Acurx: Grant/Research Support|cidara: Advisor/Consultant|cidara: Grant/Research Support|Paratek: Grant/Research Support|Seres Health: Grant/Research Support|Summit: Grant/Research Support Thomas J. Louie, MD, adiso therapeutics: Advisor/Consultant|adiso therapeutics: Grant/Research Support|crestone: Advisor/Consultant|crestone: Grant/Research Support|Finch: Advisor/Consultant|Finch: Grant/Research Support|Seres Therapeutics: Advisor/Consultant|Seres Therapeutics: Grant/Research Support|Seres Therapeutics: Honoraria|summit plc: Grant/Research Support|vedanta biosciences: Advisor/Consultant|vedanta biosciences: Grant/Research Support Jianling LI, MS, Abbott: Stocks/Bonds|Abbvie: Stocks/Bonds|ALX Oncology: Stocks/Bonds|BioNTech: Stocks/Bonds|Bluebird Bio: Stocks/Bonds|Cytokinetics: Stocks/Bonds|I-Mab: Stocks/Bonds|Johnson &amp; Johnson: Stocks/Bonds|Moderna: Stocks/Bonds|TG Therapeutics: Stocks/Bonds Esther Duperchy, PhD, Summit Plc: Employee Jose G. Montoya, MD, Summit: Honoraria|Summit: Stocks/Bonds Lori Styles, MD, Abbvie: Stocks/Bonds|Summit Therapeutics: employee|Summit Therapeutics: Stocks/Bonds Fong Clow, Sc. D, Summit Therapeutics: Employee Danelle James, MD, Summit Therapeutics: Employee.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207