MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessment of Quality of Life Among Patients With Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection Treated with Investigational Oral Microbiome Therapeutic SER-109

2023· article· en· W4318485245 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kevin W. Garey, Jinhee Jo, Anne J Gonzales-Luna, Brittany Lapin, Abhishek Deshpande, Elaine Wang, Brooke Hasson, Sissi V. Pham, Shirley P. Huang, Pat Ray Reese, Henry Wu, Elizabeth Hohmann, Paul Feuerstadt, Caterina Oneto, Charles S. Berenson, Christine U. Lee, Barbara McGovern, Lisa vonMoltke

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsClostridioidesMicrobiomeMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Investigational DrugsIntensive care medicineFecal bacteriotherapyRescue therapyInternal medicineClostridium difficileBioinformaticsBiologyMicrobiologyClinical trialAntibioticsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a debilitating disease leading to poor health-related quality of life (HRQOL), loss of productivity, anxiety, and depression. The potential association of treatment with HRQOL has not been well evaluated. Objectives: To explore the association of SER-109 compared with placebo on HRQOL in patients with recurrent CDI up to week 8. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study was a secondary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that took place at 56 sites in the US and Canada from July 2017 to April 2020 and included 182 patients randomized to SER-109 or placebo groups. Interventions: SER-109 or placebo (4 capsules once daily for 3 days) following antibiotics for CDI. Main Outcomes and Measures: Exploratory analysis of HRQOL using the disease specific Clostridioides difficile Quality of Life Survey (Cdiff32) assessed at baseline, week 1, and week 8. Results: In this study, 182 patients (109 [59.9%] female; mean age, 65.5 [16.5] years) were randomized to SER-109 (89 [48.9%]) or placebo (93 [51.1%]) groups and were included in the primary and exploratory analyses. Baseline Cdiff32 scores were similar between patients in the SER-109 and placebo groups (52.0 [18.3] vs 52.8 [18.7], respectively). The proportion of patients with overall improvement from baseline in the Cdiff32 total score was higher in the SER-109 arm than placebo at week 1 (49.4% vs 26.9%; P = .012) and week 8 (66.3% vs 48.4%; P = .001).Greater improvements in total and physical domain and subdomain scores were observed in patients in the SER-109 group compared with placebo as early as week 1, with continued improvements observed at week 8. Among patients in the placebo group, improvements in HRQOL were primarily observed in patients with nonrecurrent CDI while patients in the SER-109 group reported improvements in HRQOL, regardless of clinical outcome. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a phase 3 clinical trial, SER-109, an investigational microbiome therapeutic was associated with rapid and steady improvement in HRQOL compared with placebo through 8 weeks, an important patient-reported outcome. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03183128.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations28
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207