Comparing the efficacy of vedolizumab between males and females: a post-hoc analysis of GEMINI-1 and VARSITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vedolizumab is a first-line treatment option for ulcerative colitis. There are differences in incidence of ulcerative colitis between males and females, but whether sex affects treatment outcomes is less clear. We examined sex-based differences in patients with ulcerative colitis initiated on vedolizumab from two major randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a post-hoc analysis on participants with ulcerative colitis from the VARSITY and GEMINI-1 RCTs who received vedolizumab. Outcomes of interest were rates of clinical improvement, clinical remission, and endoscopic improvement at weeks 6, 14, and 52 in male and female participants, as were differences in concentrations of trough vedolizumab and C-reactive protein; 1009 persons in GEMINI-1 and VARSITY trials were included. Male and female patients had similar disease characteristics aside from males being more likely to have Mayo 3 grade endoscopic severity at baseline (62.8 vs. 48.9%, P < 0.001). At week 6, females were more likely to have endoscopic improvement (47.4 vs. 35.2%, P = 0.001) and increased vedolizumab trough levels [34.0 (23.0-44.5) vs. 28.9 (19.0-34.6), P < 0.001]. The probability of achieving clinical remission (28.9 vs. 34.5%, P = 0.057) or endoscopic improvement (35.5 vs. 39.3%, P = 0.212) at week 52 was not different between males and females. Females with ulcerative colitis treated with vedolizumab appear more likely to achieve early endoscopic improvement than males, though longer-term outcomes demonstrated no difference. Further studies are required to better understand mechanisms through which sex or sex-associated factors could influence response to therapy in ulcerative colitis.
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 | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".