Safety and Tolerability of SER-109 as an Investigational Microbiome Therapeutic in Adults With Recurrent <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> Infection
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: A safe and effective treatment for recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is urgently needed. Antibiotics kill toxin-producing bacteria but do not repair the disrupted microbiome, which promotes spore germination and infection recurrence. Objectives: To evaluate the safety and rate of CDI recurrence after administration of investigational microbiome therapeutic SER-109 through 24 weeks. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 3, single-arm, open-label trial (ECOSPOR IV) was conducted at 72 US and Canadian outpatient sites from October 2017 to April 2022. Adults aged 18 years or older with recurrent CDI were enrolled in 2 cohorts: (1) rollover patients from the ECOSPOR III trial who had CDI recurrence diagnosed by toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and (2) patients with at least 1 CDI recurrence (diagnosed by polymerase chain reaction [PCR] or toxin EIA), inclusive of their acute infection at study entry. Interventions: SER-109 given orally as 4 capsules daily for 3 days following symptom resolution after antibiotic treatment for CDI. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were safety, measured as the rate of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in all patients receiving any amount of SER-109, and cumulative rates of recurrent CDI (toxin-positive diarrhea requiring treatment) through week 24 in the intent-to-treat population. Results: Of 351 patients screened, 263 were enrolled (180 [68.4%] female; mean [SD] age, 64.0 [15.7] years); 29 were in cohort 1 and 234 in cohort 2. Seventy-seven patients (29.3%) were enrolled with their first CDI recurrence. Overall, 141 patients (53.6%) had TEAEs, which were mostly mild to moderate and gastrointestinal. There were 8 deaths (3.0%) and 33 patients (12.5%) with serious TEAEs; none were considered treatment related by the investigators. Overall, 23 patients (8.7%; 95% CI, 5.6%-12.8%) had recurrent CDI at week 8 (4 of 29 [13.8%; 95% CI, 3.9%-31.7%] in cohort 1 and 19 of 234 [8.1%; 95% CI, 5.0%-12.4%] in cohort 2), and recurrent CDI rates remained low through 24 weeks (36 patients [13.7%; 95% CI, 9.8%-18.4%]). At week 8, recurrent CDI rates in patients with a first recurrence were similarly low (5 of 77 [6.5%; 95% CI, 2.1%-14.5%]) as in patients with 2 or more recurrences (18 of 186 [9.7%; 95% CI, 5.8%-14.9%]). Analyses by select baseline characteristics showed consistently low recurrent CDI rates in patients younger than 65 years vs 65 years or older (5 of 126 [4.0%; 95% CI, 1.3%-9.0%] vs 18 of 137 [13.1%; 95% CI, 8.0%-20.0%]) and patients enrolled based on positive PCR results (3 of 69 [4.3%; 95% CI, 0.9%-12.2%]) vs those with positive toxin EIA results (20 of 192 [10.4%; 95% CI, 6.5%-15.6%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial, oral SER-109 was well tolerated in a patient population with recurrent CDI and prevalent comorbidities. The rate of recurrent CDI was low regardless of the number of prior recurrences, demographics, or diagnostic approach, supporting the beneficial impact of SER-109 for patients with CDI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03183141.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it