Changes in health-related quality of life and associations with improvements in clinical efficacy: a Phase 2 study of mirikizumab in patients with ulcerative colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Mirikizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the interleukin-23 p19 subunit, was effective in a Phase 2 study (NCT02589665) of moderately-to-severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). We studied mirikizumab's impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). DESIGN: HRQoL was evaluated using the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS). Mixed effects models for repeated measures compared score changes between mirikizumab and placebo groups. Additional analyses evaluated associations between HRQoL score changes and achievement of efficacy endpoints at weeks 12 and 52. RESULTS: At week 12, IBDQ improved compared with placebo for all mirikizumab groups except mirikizumab 50 mg (50 mg, p=0.073; 200 mg, p<0.001; 600 mg, p<0.001). SF-36 PCS was significantly higher in all mirikizumab groups at week 12 (50 mg, p=0.011; 200 mg, p=0.022; 600 mg, p=0.002); MCS was significantly higher in mirikizumab 200 and 600 mg groups compared with placebo (50 mg, p=0.429; 200 mg, p=0.028; 600 mg, p<0.001). Achievement of clinical response and remission were associated with greater HRQoL improvements at week 12. Improvements in HRQoL scores were sustained through week 52. Of the clinical symptoms evaluated, reduction in rectal bleeding was associated with greater improvements in IBDQ and SF-36 scores. CONCLUSION: Mirikizumab improved HRQoL in patients with moderately-to-severely active UC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".