MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S1446 Efficacy and Safety of Long-Term Mirikizumab Treatment in Patients With Moderate to Severe Crohn’s Disease

2024· article· en· W4403722140 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce E. Sands, Geert D’Haens, Tadakazu Hisamatsu, Vipul Jairath, Edward L. Barnes, Paola Pellanda, Rebecca R. Hozak, Zhantao Lin, Guanglei Yu, Marijana Protić, Charles Owen, Monika Fischer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrohn's diseaseDiseaseTerm (time)Intensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Mirikizumab (miri), an anti-IL-23p19 antibody, was efficacious and safe as a treatment for moderately-to-severely active Crohn's disease (CD) over 104 weeks in a Phase 2 study (AMAG; NCT02891226). Here we show continued activity through an additional 3 years (up to 6.5 years total) in a long-term extension study, AMAX (NCT04232553). Methods: Data through Jan 20, 2024 are presented for all patients who enrolled in AMAX from AMAG; patients continued on open-label miri 300 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks. Endoscopy was performed at 3 years in AMAX. Efficacy definitions were: endoscopic response, ≥50% reduction from AMAG baseline in Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn’s Disease (SES-CD) Total Score; endoscopic remission, SES-CD Total Score ≤4 and ≥2-point reduction from baseline with no subscore >1 for any individual variable; Crohn’s Disease Activity Score (CDAI) response, CDAI decrease from baseline ≥100 points and/or < 150; CDAI remission, CDAI < 150. Data are presented as-observed. Results: 106 patients enrolled in AMAX; at database lock, median miri treatment duration (Q1, Q3) was 5.6 (5.3, 5.9) years. At Week 156 of AMAX, 18 patients (17.0%) had discontinued. For endoscopic results, 17 patients (16.0%) did not yet have data available for week 156. At Week 156 of AMAX, relative to AMAG baseline, the endoscopic response rate was 76.1% (n=54/71) and remission rate was 53.5% (n=38/71). For CDAI, 33 (31%) patients were ongoing but had missing data at Week 156; the CDAI response rate was 96.3% (n=52/54), and CDAI remission rate was 87.3% (n=48/55). Summary safety data in AMAX (see Table 1) showed that treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 81.1% (n=86) of patients, with 9 (8.5%) patients reporting serious adverse events. Rates of TEAEs of special interest were as follows: any infection/infestation, 54.7% (n=58); opportunistic infections, 3.8% (n=4; 1 candidiasis; 3 herpes zoster [with concomitant azathioprine use in 2 of these cases]); malignancies, 0.9% (n=1 non-melanoma skin cancer [basal cell carcinoma]); and cerebro-cardiovascular events, 0.9% (n=1 bradycardia). Conclusion: Miri demonstrated durable efficacy up to >6 years in patients with moderately-to-severely active CD. Rates of endoscopic and clinical remission were generally maintained from the end of the AMAG maintenance period at Week 52. No unexpected safety events were reported and there were few discontinuations due to adverse events. Table 1. - Summary of Efficacy and Safety Through 156 Weeks in AMAX Endoscopic response 54/71 (76.1) Endoscopic remission 38/71 (53.5) CDAI response 52/54 (96.3) CDAI remission 48/55 (87.3) TEAEMildModerateSevere 86/106 (81.1)28/106 (26.4)50/106 (47.2)8/106 (7.5) Serious adverse events 9/106 (8.5) Deaths 0 Discontinuation due to AEs 2/106 (1.9) AE= adverse event; CDAI= Crohn’s Disease Activity Score; TEAE=treatment emergent adverse event. All data are shown as n/N (%), where N is the number of patients with data available at Week 156 for efficacy, and all patients enrolled from AMAG into AMAX for safety. See Methods for response and remission definitions.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→