MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380371766 · doi:10.1177/17562848231174277

Safety of fecal microbiota, live-jslm (REBYOTA<sup>™</sup>) in individuals with recurrent <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection: data from five prospective clinical trials

2023· article· en· W4380371766 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTherapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of VictoriaIsland Health
FundersFerring
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboAdverse effectClinical trialNauseaInternal medicineRegimen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: infections (rCDIs), but prospectively collected safety data needed to broaden patient access and protect public health have been limited. Objectives: We provide cumulative safety data from five prospective clinical trials evaluating fecal microbiota, live-jslm (RBL) - the first microbiota-based live biotherapeutic product approved by the US Food and Drug Administration - for preventing rCDI in adults. Design: Integrated safety analysis includes three phase II trials (PUNCH CD, PUNCH CD2, PUNCH Open-Label) and two phase III trials (PUNCH CD3, PUNCH CD3-OLS) of RBL. Methods: Trial participants were at least 18 years of age with documented rCDI who completed standard-of-care antibiotic therapy before treatment with RBL. Assigned study treatment regimen was one or two doses of RBL (or placebo) administered rectally, depending on the trial design. In four of the five trials, participants with CDI recurrence within 8 weeks after RBL or placebo administration were eligible for treatment with open-label RBL. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were recorded for at least 6 months following last study treatment; in PUNCH CD2 and PUNCH Open-Label trials, TEAEs and serious TEAEs were collected through 12 and 24 months, respectively. Results: Among the five trials, 978 participants received at least one dose of RBL (assigned treatment or after recurrence) and 83 participants received placebo only. TEAEs were reported in 60.2% of Placebo Only participants and 66.4% of RBL Only participants. Only abdominal pain, nausea, and flatulence were significantly higher in the RBL Only group compared with the Placebo Only group. Most TEAEs were mild or moderate in severity and were most frequently related to preexisting conditions. There were no reported infections for which the causative pathogen was traced to RBL. Potentially life-threatening TEAEs were infrequent (3.0% of participants). Conclusion: Across five clinical trials, RBL was well tolerated in adults with rCDI. In aggregate, these data consistently demonstrated the safety of RBL.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.323 · 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