MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318539746 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac190.0712

P582 Efficacy of etrasimod at week 52 among subjects who reached clinical response at week 12: post hoc analysis of the phase 3 ELEVATE UC 52 trial

2023· article· en· W4318539746 on OpenAlexaff
Séverine Vermeire, B E Sands, Marla C. Dubinsky, B G Feagan, Remo Panaccione, Vipul Jairath, Andrés Yarur, Michael Chiorean, Julián Panés, M Goetsch, Christopher J. Rabbat, P Shah, Joseph Wu, Subrata Ghosh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePost-hoc analysisPost hocInternal medicineClinical trialPlaceboGastroenterologyClinical endpointUlcerative colitisDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Etrasimod is an investigational, once-daily, oral, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor 1,4,5 (S1P1,4,5) modulator in development for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). The ELEVATE UC 52 trial utilized a treat-through design which evaluated efficacy at week 52 among all subjects randomised from baseline. Here, we report a post hoc analysis of efficacy at week 52 among subjects who did or did not achieve clinical response at the end of the 12-week induction period in ELEVATE UC 52. Methods In ELEVATE UC 52 (NCT03945188), subjects (16-80 years) with moderately to severely active UC were randomised 2:1 to once-daily etrasimod 2 mg or placebo (PBO). This post hoc analysis assessed achievement of clinical remission, 12-week corticosteroid-free remission, endoscopic improvement, endoscopic improvement-histologic remission, and symptomatic remission at week 52 among subjects with baseline MMS 5-9 who did or did not achieve clinical response criteria at week 12 (defined as a ≥2-point and ≥30% decrease from baseline in MMS and a ≥1-point decrease from baseline in rectal bleeding subscore or an absolute rectal bleeding subscore ≤1). Results At week 12 in ELEVATE UC 52, 171 (62.4%) etrasimod-treated subjects vs 46 (34.1%) PBO-treated subjects achieved clinical response (P<0.001) and were included in the week 52 clinical responder analysis. Among clinical responders at week 12, subjects treated with etrasimod were more likely to be in clinical remission at week 52 vs PBO (49.1% [n=84/171] vs 17.4% [n=8/46]; P<0.001) (Figure 1). Similar results were observed for the achievement of all other efficacy endpoints at week 52 among those who met clinical response criteria at week 12 (all P<0.05). At week 12 in ELEVATE UC 52, 103 (37.6%) etrasimod-treated subjects and 89 (65.9%) PBO-treated subjects either did not achieve clinical response at week 12 or had discontinued the study prior to the week 12 assessment. There were no significant treatment differences in achievement of efficacy endpoints at week 52 among subjects who did not achieve clinical response at week 12. Conclusion Among subjects who reached clinical response criteria at week 12, greater proportions of etrasimod-treated subjects vs PBO-treated subjects achieved week 52 efficacy across both objective and subjective measures of disease activity. Among subjects who did not reach clinical response or had discontinued prior to week 12, no significant treatment differences were observed at week 52 between etrasimod-treated subjects vs PBO-treated subjects. These results may help contextualize the 52-week efficacy results of ELEVATE UC 52 when considering other treatments that utilized re-randomisation of responder designs.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.315
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 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