MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4318539483 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac190.0521

P391 Relative association of bowel urgency clinically meaningful improvement or bowel urgency remission versus stool frequency remission and rectal bleeding remission with improvement in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire scores in patients with moderately-to-severely active Ulcerative Colitis: An analysis from LUCENT-1 and LUCENT-2 phase 3 clinical trials

2023· article· en· W4318539483 on OpenAlexaff
B E Sands, B G Feagan, Anthony Keohane, William Eastman, Kristina A. Traxler, Stefanie Schreiber, Vipul Jairath, Alessandro Armuzzi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity HospitalWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflammatory bowel diseaseMedicineUlcerative colitisInternal medicineConfoundingGastroenterologyDefecationRandomized controlled trialQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Bowel urgency is increasingly being recognized as an impactful symptom in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC)1. However, limited information is available regarding its potential association with other patient reported outcomes. We assessed the association of bowel urgency clinically meaningful improvement (CMI) or bowel urgency remission with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) scores whilst adjusting for the potential confounding effects of stool frequency (SF) and rectal bleeding (RB) remission using data from LUCENT-1 (NCT03518086) and LUCENT-2 (NCT03524092) phase 3 trials. Methods Bowel urgency severity was assessed by the Urgency Numeric Rating Scale (UNRS) (0=no urgency to 10=worst possible urgency). Bowel urgency CMI was defined as ≥3-point decrease in UNRS compared to baseline and bowel urgency remission was defined as UNRS of 0 or 1.2 IBDQ scores (range: 32–224) were calculated; higher scores indicate better quality of life. Mediation analyses were performed to examine the relative association between direct effects of bowel urgency CMI and bowel urgency remission (separate predictors) and IBDQ scores while adjusting for the potential confounding effects of SF remission and RB remission (mediators). Analyses were treatment agnostic and combined patients from mirikizumab and placebo groups from LUCENT-1 (N=1162) and LUCENT-2 (N=544) trials at Week (W) 12 and 40 (W52 of continuous treatment). Results At W12 and W52, bowel urgency remission directly accounted for 44.8% and 32.5% improvement in IBDQ total score, respectively; 22.7% and 39.1% of improvement was mediated by RB remission and 32.5% and 28.4% by SF remission, respectively. At W12, bowel urgency remission resulted in the largest proportion of improvement in each of the IBDQ domain subscores, whereas at W52, RB remission had a greater confounding effect (Fig. 1A). At W12 and W52, bowel urgency CMI accounted for 70% and 57.3% improvement in IBDQ total score, respectively; 12.8% and 25.6% of effects were mediated by RB remission and 17.2% and 17.1% by SF remission, respectively (Fig. 1B). Bowel urgency CMI accounted for the largest proportion of association with improvement in each of the IBDQ domain subscores at both W12 and W52. Conclusion Improvements in IBDQ scores were primarily ascribed to bowel urgency remission and bowel urgency CMI relative to RB remission and SF remission, particularly at W12, in patients with moderately-to-severely active UC. These findings suggest that bowel urgency is a critical and independent symptom that considerably impacts patients’ quality of life. References:

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→