MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391163063 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.0670

P540 Non-serious adverse events in patients with ulcerative colitis receiving etrasimod: An analysis of the phase 2 OASIS and phase 3 ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12 clinical trials

2024· article· en· W4391163063 on OpenAlexaff
Charlie W. Lees, Joana Torres, Yvette Leung, Séverine Vermeire, Marc Fellmann, Irene Modesto, A McDonnell, Krisztina Lazin, Michael J. Keating, Martina Goetsch, Joseph Wu, Edward V. Loftus

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUlcerative colitisPhase (matter)MedicineAdverse effectPhases of clinical researchClinical trialInternal medicineGastroenterologyIntensive care medicineDiseaseChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Etrasimod is an oral, once-daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P)1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). Adverse events (AEs) pertaining to tolerability, laboratory and serious AEs are described elsewhere1,2; we present a post hoc analysis of the incidence, onset and duration of the most commonly occurring non-serious AEs in the etrasimod UC clinical programme. Methods Data from the pooled Placebo-controlled UC cohort, derived from the phase 2 OASIS (NCT02447302) and phase 3 ELEVATE UC 52 (NCT03945188) and ELEVATE UC 12 (NCT03996369) double-blind clinical trials, were included. Cohorts comprised OASIS and ELEVATE UC 12 12-week induction periods alongside the ELEVATE UC 52 12-week induction and 40-week maintenance periods utilising a "treat-through" design. Patients (pts) with moderately to severely active UC were eligible for the etrasimod UC clinical programme. Pts were randomised to etrasimod 1 mg once daily (QD; OASIS only), etrasimod 2 mg QD or placebo. Proportions and incidence rates (IRs) of non-serious AEs (MedDRA v24.1 Preferred Terms of headache, pyrexia, nausea, fatigue and dizziness) were analysed in the Placebo-controlled UC cohort. Results Among 943 pts (any dose of etrasimod, N=629 [288.1 pt years (PY)]; placebo, N=314 [115.1 PY]), there were 77, 36, 30, 15 and 23 headache, pyrexia, nausea, fatigue and dizziness AEs, respectively. All were non-serious and did not lead to treatment discontinuation, apart from one case of pyrexia in which early termination visits were incomplete. Proportions and IRs (per 100 PY) for headache and dizziness AEs were higher with etrasimod (any dose) vs placebo (IRs: 13.45 vs 8.63 and 6.52 vs 1.69, respectively); IRs for other non-serious AEs were similar in etrasimod (any dose) and placebo groups (Table). Onset of AEs varied over time and most AEs were short in duration (Figure shows onset and duration for headache and dizziness AEs). Most AEs were deemed not related to study treatment by the site investigator. Pts with dizziness on Days 1–3 had similar changes in heart rate vs those with dizziness after Day 3. No consistent trend in heart rate was observed in pts receiving etrasimod with early dizziness. Conclusion Among pts in the etrasimod UC clinical programme, all headache, pyrexia, nausea, fatigue and dizziness events were non-serious. IRs were similar for most non-serious AEs across treatment groups, excluding headache and dizziness. Most non-serious AEs were short in duration and judged as not related to study treatment, suggesting they may not impact on the overall tolerability of etrasimod. References 1. Sandborn WJ et al. Gastroenterology 2020; 158: 550–61. 2. Sandborn WJ et al. Lancet 2023; 401: 1159–71.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 Colitis→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→