MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323353268 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac036.201

A201 EFFECT OF MIRIKIZUMAB ON BOWEL URGENCY CLINICALLY MEANINGFUL IMPROVEMENT AND REMISSION: RESULTS FROM THE PHASE 3 LUCENT INDUCTION AND MAINTENANCE STUDIES

2023· article· en· W4323353268 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Travis, T Hibi, Tadakazu Hisamatsu, Deborah L. Fisher, Mingyang Shan, Donald B. Rubin, Jennifer Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboImputation (statistics)PopulationInternal medicineClinical endpointRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologySurgeryMissing data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Bowel urgency (BU) was assessed in mirikizumab (miri) Phase 3 LUCENT studies in moderately-to-severely active UC using the validated Urgency Numeric Rating Scale (UNRS). UNRS measures BU severity in the past 24 hours from 0 (no urgency) to 10 (worst possible urgency). Psychometric evaluation of the UNRS showed Clinically Meaningful Improvement (CMI) is >3 point change; Remission is a score of 0 or 1. Purpose This analysis evaluated the proportions of patients in LUCENT studies achieving BU CMI and BU remission. Method The modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population (patients receiving ≥1 dose of miri or placebo (PBO); N= 1281) was randomized at induction study baseline in a 3:1 ratio to IV doses of 300mg miri or PBO every 4 weeks (Q4W) during induction (W0, 4, and 8). Patients achieving Clinical Response, measured by Modified Mayo Score (MMS), to miri during induction were re-randomized at W0 of the maintenance study in a 2:1 ratio to subcutaneous (SC) 200mg miri or PBO Q4W through W40 (52 weeks of treatment). Patients recorded their UNRS score daily in an e-diary. Mean weekly UNRS scores were calculated from diary data if ≥4 days of data were available. Rates of BU CMI and BU remission in the miri v PBO groups were compared at W12 (induction) in the mITT population with a baseline UNRS score ≥3, and W52 (maintenance) among miri clinical responders at W12 with a baseline UNRS score ≥3. Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests with non-responder imputation for missing values were used for all treatment comparisons. Result(s) Patient population: mean age 43 years, 60% male, disease duration 7 years; 63.0% left-sided colitis; 36.3% pancolitis; 46.7% moderate disease (MMS 4-6); 53.2% severe disease (MMS 7-9). Significantly higher proportions of miri versus PBO patients achieved BU CMI (48.7% v 32.2%) and BU remission (22.1% v 12.3%) at W12 (both p<0.001; Table) in the induction study. Similarly, at W40 of maintenance, significantly greater proportion of miri patients achieved BU CMI (65.2% v 41.9%) and BU remission (42.9% v 25.0%) compared to PBO among miri induction responders (both p<0.001; Table). Image Conclusion(s) Miri had a highly significant and clinically meaningful benefit on reducing bowel urgency, one of the most disruptive UC symptoms. The Urgency Numeric Rating Scale usefully quantified the baseline level and change in bowel urgency after treatment across a spectrum of severity. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below Other Please indicate your source of funding; Eli Lilly and Company Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207