MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391161806 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.0835

P705 Assessment of age on the efficacy and safety among patients in the etrasimod ELEVATE ulcerative colitis clinical programme

2024· article· en· W4391161806 on OpenAlexaff
Gary R. Lichtenstein, Jessica R. Allegretti, Edward V. Loftus, Peter M. Irving, Rupa Banerjee, A Charabaty, Tanja Kuehbacher, Eustratios Bananis, John Woolcott, Alexis B Dalam, Krisztina Lazin, Michael J. Keating, A McDonnell, Silvio Danese

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUlcerative colitisMedicineInternal medicineGastroenterologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Etrasimod is an oral, once-daily (QD), selective sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P)1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). Previous work has shown age can impact treatment safety and efficacy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.1 This post hoc analysis investigated the impact of age on the safety and efficacy of etrasimod in patients with UC in the phase 3 ELEVATE UC clinical programme. Methods Data pooled from the ELEVATE UC 52 (NCT03945188) and ELEVATE UC 12 (NCT03996369) trials were analysed in patients receiving etrasimod 2 mg QD and placebo. ELEVATE UC 52 had a treat-through design comprising a 12-week induction period followed by a 40-week maintenance period. ELEVATE UC 12 was a 12-week induction trial. Proportions and incidence rates (IRs) per 100 patient-years from pooled data of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and events of interest were stratified by age (<40 years, 40–59 years, ≥60 years) and analysed in patients who received ≥1 dose of etrasimod or placebo. Efficacy analyses were evaluated in patients with baseline Modified Mayo score (MMS) 5–9 for the primary efficacy endpoint (clinical remission) and select secondary endpoints at Week 12 (both trials) and Week 52 (ELEVATE UC 52) stratified by age. Results There were 787 patients enrolled in the ELEVATE UC programme, of whom 420 (53.4%) were aged <40 years, 276 (35.1%) were aged 40–59 years and 91 (11.6%) were aged ≥60 years. The proportions and IRs of TEAEs and events of interest were mostly similar between age groups and treatment arms (Table). IRs of arthralgia, fatigue, hypertension and pyrexia were higher in older age groups, regardless of treatment arm. Serious AEs and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation were low and consistent across all age subgroups. Serious infections and infection events of interest were balanced across age groups and treatment arms. Regardless of age subgroup, significantly more patients treated with etrasimod 2 mg QD vs placebo achieved the primary and select secondary efficacy endpoints at Week 12 and Week 52 (Figure). Conclusion The safety profile of etrasimod 2 mg QD in the UC population was consistent across age groups, and with no new risks other than the estimated risks associated with increasing age.2 Patients receiving etrasimod in the ELEVATE UC programme showed significant clinical benefit as assessed by clinical remission, symptomatic remission and endoscopic improvement compared with placebo, regardless of age. References 1. Lichtenstein GR et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2023; 29: 27–41. 2. Luo J et al. JMIR Med Inform 2016; 4: e30.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207