Body Surface Area-Based Dosing of Infliximab is Superior to Standard Weight-Based Dosing in Children With Very Early Onset Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aims Children with very early onset inflammatory bowel disease (VEO-IBD) are uniquely at risk of inadequate infliximab (IFX) exposure. We studied the association between standard body weight (BW)-based and body surface area (BSA)-based dosing strategies and outcomes. Methods We identified VEO-IBD patients treated with IFX before 9 years at a single center. Patients were separated into those that received a BSA-based dose (200 mg/m2) and standard BW dosing (5 mg/kg). IFX drug levels, dose intensification, time on steroids, and long-term outcomes were compared. Receiver operator characteristic curves determined the optimal BW- and BSA-based dose to achieve a trough ≥10 μg/ml at dose 4 (IFX#4). Results Forty-three children with VEO-IBD were identified. Receiver operator characteristic curves demonstrated optimal BW- and BSA-based doses to achieve IFX trough ≥10 μg/ml at IFX#4 were 7.5 mg/kg and 180mg/m2. Children were classified to standard BW dosing (22/43) and BSA dosing (10/43). IFX#4 trough was significantly higher in those who received BSA dosing (BSA 18.6 μg/ml [interquartile range 10.8–28.1] vs BW 5.1 μg/ml [interquartile range 2.6–10.7], P = .04). BSA dosing was more likely to achieve a target drug level >10 μg/ml at IFX#4 (BSA 70% vs BW 18%, P = .02). BW dosing was associated with a greater likelihood of dose escalation (BW 82% vs BSA 30%, P < .01) and a shorter time to first escalation. BSA dosing was associated with shorter time spent on steroids ( P = .02). Conclusion Young children require higher IFX dosing to achieve adequate drug exposure. Our data support the use of a BSA-based dose of 200 mg/m 2 or, if a BW-based approach is used, 7.5 mg/kg. BSA dosing allows the use of a consistent dose over the age and weight spectrum.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".