MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4397042457 · doi:10.1681/asn.20233411s1969b

Safety and Efficacy of Avacopan in Patients 65 Years and Older with ANCA-Associated Vasculitis

2023· article· en· W4397042457 on OpenAlexaff
Duvuru Geetha, Christian Pagnoux, Sebastian E. Sattui, Peter A. Merkel, David Jayne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVasculitis and related conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsANCA-Associated VasculitisMedicineVasculitisInternal medicineDermatologyGastroenterologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Older adults are at increased risk of glucocorticoid (GC)-related toxicity; minimization of GCs is a major focus for treatment of patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV). Although AAV especially affects older adults, many studies have excluded patients >75 years (y). In the Phase 3 ADVOCATE trial of avacopan, there was no exclusion criterion for maximum participant age. Methods: This post hoc analysis reports safety and efficacy of avacopan compared to a prednisone taper in the subgroups of patients 65-74y (N=109) and ≥75y (N=51). Results: In both studied age and treatment groups, a similar proportion of patients (69.4-73.1%) achieved remission at week 26 (Table 1). In the 65-74y age group, sustained remission rates at week 52 were 55.1% in the prednisone arm and 65.0% in the avacopan arm. Relapse rates were 18.8% in the prednisone arm and 12.3% in the avacopan arm. The total all-source median GC dose was 5.3x higher in the prednisone vs avacopan arm. Serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 22/49 patients (45%) in the prednisone arm (2 deaths) and 25/60 patients (42%) in the avacopan arm (2 deaths). In the ≥75y age group, sustained remission rates at week 52 were 56.0% in the prednisone arm and 65.4% in the avacopan arm. Relapse rates were 20.8% in the prednisone arm and 3.8% in the avacopan arm. Median GC dose was 4.8x higher in the prednisone vs avacopan arm. SAEs occurred in 14/25 patients (56%) in the prednisone arm and 17/26 patients (65%) in the avacopan arm. Other results including renal and quality of life outcomes are in Table 1.Table 1:: Safety and Efficacy Outcomes in Patients with ANCA-Associated Vasculitis Aged 65 to 74 Years and 75 Years and Older in the ADVOCATE Trial of AvacopanConclusions: A subgroup analysis of patients ≥65y demonstrated similar trends of efficacy and safety of avacopan as in the overall ADVOCATE trial, including reductions in GC-related toxicities, supporting a role for avacopan in the treatment of older patients with AAV. Funding: Commercial Support - Amgen

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicVasculitis and related conditions→French-language works237,207→