P66 Corticosteroid-sparing effect in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis treated with mirikizumab maintenance therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Introduction</h3> Mirikizumab’s corticosteroid (CS)-sparing effect was assessed in the LUCENT-2 maintenance trial among patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) receiving CS at baseline. <h3>Methods</h3> In LUCENT-1, patients on mirikizumab or placebo who entered the study on CS remained on their stable baseline dose (≤20 mg/day prednisone equivalent) during induction (Week [W] 0 to W12). Patients randomized to mirikizumab induction and achieving clinical response (N=365) at W12 were re-randomized 2:1 in LUCENT-2 to mirikizumab (200 mg/4 weeks) or placebo for maintenance (W12–52). LUCENT-1 responders began a CS taper upon entering LUCENT-2 by tapering the >10 mg daily dose by 5 mg/week until receiving 10 mg/day, and then 2.5 mg/week until 0 mg/day. For those receiving ≤10 mg/day, the daily dose was tapered by 2.5 mg/week until 0 mg/day. <h3>Results</h3> Of the mirikizumab induction responders who were re-randomized in LUCENT-2, 33% (59/179) of placebo patients were baseline CS users compared with 34% (125/365) of mirikizumab patients. The median baseline CS dose was 20 mg/day. At W52, a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with mirikizumab in maintenance achieved clinical remission while off CS at W52 vs placebo, clinical remission while off CS for ≥12 weeks, and clinical remission with symptomatic remission at W40 while off CS for ≥12 weeks (all p≤0.01). A significantly greater proportion of patients treated with mirikizumab had discontinued CS by W24, W40, and W52 compared to placebo (all p<0.001). Among patients who completed W52 of mirikizumab treatment, 95.2% had discontinued CS. <h3>Conclusions</h3> Mirikizumab’s CS-sparing effect in patients with moderately to severely active UC is clinically meaningful and aligned with long-term treatment goals of CS discontinuation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".