Mirikizumab Improves Quality of Life in Patients With Moderately-to-Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: Results From the Phase 3 LUCENT-1 Induction and LUCENT-2 Maintenance Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Mirikizumab, an anti-IL-23p19 antibody, demonstrated efficacy in phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled LUCENT-1 (induction/NCT03518086) and LUCENT-2 (maintenance/NCT03524092) ulcerative colitis (UC) studies. We evaluated the effect of mirikizumab on quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes in these studies. Methods In LUCENT-1, 1162 patients with moderately-to-severely active UC were randomized 3:1 to receive mirikizumab 300 mg intravenous or placebo every 4 weeks (Q4W) for 12 weeks. In LUCENT-2, mirikizumab induction responders (N = 544) were re-randomized 2:1 to receive mirikizumab 200 mg subcutaneous or placebo Q4W through week (W) 40 (W52 of treatment). QoL was assessed at W12 and W52 using patient-reported outcomes. Treatments were statistically compared using analysis of covariance model (continuous outcomes) and Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test (binary outcomes). Results At W12 and W52, mirikizumab showed significant improvement in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) total and domain scores (P < .001); 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS), Mental Component Summary (MCS), and domain scores (P < .05); EQ-5D-5L scores (P < .001); Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (UC) scores (P < .05); Patient Global Rating of Severity (P < .001); and Patient Global Rating of Change (P < .01) scores. A significantly higher proportion of mirikizumab-treated patients achieved IBDQ response (W12: 72.7% vs 55.8%; W52: 79.2% vs 49.2%; P < .001), IBDQ remission (W12: 57.5% vs 39.8%; W52: 72.3% vs 43.0%; P < .001), and clinically important improvements in PCS (W12: 50.6% vs 41.5%; W52: 61.9% vs 36.9%; P < .01) and MCS (W12: 44.2% vs 37.8%; W52: 51.2% vs 34.6%; P < .05) scores. Conclusions Mirikizumab improved QoL in patients with moderately-to-severely active UC in phase 3 LUCENT-1 and LUCENT-2 studies. Clinical trials registration number LUCENT-1: NCT03518086; LUCENT-2: NCT03524092
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".