MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318579858 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac190.0760

P630 Upadacitinib Improves Clinical 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· W4318579858 on OpenAlexaff
S Schreiber, A. J. Lim, Ana P. Lacerda, Jessica R. Allegretti, Kenji Watanabe, Dana J. Lukin, E Dubenco, Sharanya Ford, Jessica Oomen, Qian Zhou, J Liu, Édouard Louis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdverse effectInternal medicineClinical trialGastroenterologyCrohn's diseasePlaceboMaintenance therapyRandomized controlled trialPhases of clinical researchSurgeryDiseaseChemotherapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Upadacitinib (UPA), an oral, selective Janus kinase inhibitor, demonstrated significantly greater efficacy compared with placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease (CD) in phase 3 multicentre, double-blind, PBO-controlled induction U-EXCEL and U-EXCEED, and maintenance U-ENDURE trials.1-3 This analysis compared clinical outcomes in pts treated with UPA vs PBO once daily (QD) among pts without or with a history of biologic failure. Methods Eligible pts with an average daily very soft/liquid stool frequency (SF) ≥4 and/or abdominal pain score (APS) ≥2, plus a Simple Endoscopic Score for CD (excluding the narrowing component) ≥6 (≥4 for pts with isolated ileal disease) were randomized (2:1) to UPA 45 mg (UPA45) or PBO in U-EXCEL and U-EXCEED. Induction responders (≥30% decrease in average daily very soft/liquid SF and/or APS, neither worse than baseline) to 12-week (wk) UPA45 were re-randomized 1:1:1 for maintenance to UPA 15 mg (UPA15), UPA 30 mg (UPA30) or PBO QD in U-ENDURE. Clinical remission, response (CR-100), and maintenance of clinical remission, along with adverse events (AEs) were assessed through maintenance wk 52. Results Baseline demographics/characteristics were similar for all treatment groups; pts with prior biologic failure were 71.5% PBO and 72.0% UPA45 in induction and 76.4% PBO, 73.4% UPA15 and 75.6% UPA30 in maintenance. Among pts without/with biologic failure history, those treated with UPA45 exhibited higher rates for clinical remission at wk 12 (CDAI: UPA45 54.1%/40.5% vs PBO 39.4%/19.4%; SF/APS: UPA45 54.0%/42.2% vs PBO 28.3%/14.1%, Fig. 1A). Similar results were observed at wk 52 with UPA15 and UPA30 vs PBO (Fig. 1B). Irrespective of biologic failure status, a higher proportion of patients on either UPA dose maintained clinical remission from maintenance wk 0 to wk 52 (Fig. 1C). Higher proportions of pts with prior biologic failure achieved CR-100 with UPA45 vs PBO at wk 12 (53.2% vs 26. 9%); at wk 52 differences from PBO were found for either UPA dose in pts without or with prior biologic failure (Fig. 1D). Serious AEs and serious infections were similar across treatment groups (Tables 1-2). No tuberculosis or adjudicated cardiovascular events were reported. Malignancy, opportunistic infections, thrombotic events, and gastrointestinal perforations were infrequent (<1.0% or 10 E/100PY). Conclusion All upadacitinib doses achieved greater clinical efficacy than placebo during induction and maintenance periods, irrespective of patient prior exposure to biologic therapy, 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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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