MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318539492 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac190.0017

OP17 Upadacitinib Improves Endoscopic Outcomes in Patients with Moderate to Severely Active Crohn’s Disease Irrespective of Previous Failure to Respond to Biologics or Conventional Therapies

2023· article· en· W4318539492 on OpenAlexaff
B G Feagan, S Horst, G.W. Dryden, JO Lindsay, Maria Rosaria Ferrante, E Dubenco, Ana P. Lacerda, Sharanya Ford, S. Anyanwu, Qian Zhou, J Liu, M Chen, S Schreiber

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicinePlaceboAdverse effectCrohn's diseasePopulationGastroenterologyAbdominal painStatistical significanceClinical trialRandomized controlled trialSurgeryDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Upadacitinib (UPA), an oral, reversible JAK inhibitor, demonstrated superior efficacy compared to placebo (PBO) in patients with moderate to severe Crohn’s disease (CD) in 2 multicentre, phase 3 induction (U-EXCEL and U-EXCEED), and 1 maintenance (U-ENDURE) trial.1-3 This sub-analysis assessed endoscopic outcomes in patients with or without a history of biologic failure (inadequate response or intolerance) among those receiving UPA treatment. Methods Eligible patients had average daily stool frequency [SF] ≥4 and/or abdominal pain score [APS]≥2, plus a Simple Endoscopic Score for CD (excluding the presence of narrowing component) ≥6 [≥4 for isolated ileal disease]). Patients received UPA 45 mg once daily (QD; UPA45) or PBO (2:1) for 12 weeks (wks). Patients that achieved SF/APS clinical response after 12 weeks of treatment with UPA45 (≥ 30% decrease in daily very soft/liquid SF and/or ≥ 30% decrease in daily abdominal pain APS with neither worse than baseline) were re-randomized (1:1:1) to UPA 30 mg QD (UPA30), UPA15 mg QD (UPA15) or PBO for 52 wks of maintenance. Endoscopic response\ remission were evaluated by central reading at wk 12 induction and wk 52 maintenance. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed through wk 52. Statistical significance in comparisons was not assessed due to an inability to control for type I error in subgroup analysis. Results Baseline characteristics/demographics were similar across treatment groups. In the pooled induction population (U-EXCEED+U-EXCEL), 72.0% UPA45 and 71.5% PBO patients had history of prior biologic failure. In U-ENDURE, 73.4% UPA15, 75.6% UPA30, and 76.4% PBO patients had history of prior biologic failure. In patients without or with biologic failure, UPA demonstrated higher rates for endoscopic response compared to PBO at wk 12 (52.0%, 35.7% UPA45 vs 16.2%, 5.3% PBO, Figure 1A) and wk 52 (Figure 1B). Similarly, in patients without or with a history of biologic failure, UPA exhibited higher rates of endoscopic remission at wk 12 (36.0%, 19.6% UPA45 vs. 10.1%, 2.8% PBO, Figure 1A) and wk 52 (Figure 1B). Differences from PBO were found in endoscopic response or remission in patients that remained in response/remission from the entry of maintenance to wk 52 for either dose, regardless of prior history of biologic failure (Figure 1C). UPA treatment was well-tolerated, with no new safety risks observed compared to the known safety profile of UPA (Tables 1-2). Conclusion Upadacitinib achieved clinically meaningful endoscopic outcomes, which were maintained up to 1 year, irrespective of a patient’s prior biologic treatment, with an acceptable safety profile.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207