MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

S1153 Treatment Utilization and Sequencing in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn's Disease

2024· article· en· W4403726496 on OpenAlexaff
Vipul Jairath, Handing Xie, Jing Wang, Dalbir Dhiraj, Ayush Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUlcerative colitisCrohn's diseaseGastroenterologyInternal medicineDiseaseCrohn disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD), collectively referred to as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), are chronic disorders of the gastrointestinal tract typically marked by remission and relapse.1 Recently new therapies have become available to treat IBD though there is a paucity of data on their use in practice. This study assessed treatment sequencing in patients with UC & CD newly initiated on advanced therapies (AT) or immunosuppressants (IMS). Methods: This retrospective US claims database (Merative™ Marketscan®) study assessed treatment sequencing over a 24-month period in adults with UC & CD newly initiated on an AT or IMS therapy between January 1, 2017-March 31, 2021. FDA-approved therapies through March 2021 were included. Index date was defined as the first prescription date of AT or IMS. Patients were required to be continuously enrolled for at least 12-months pre-index (baseline period) and 24-months post-index (follow-up period). Descriptive statistics were used to assess baseline characteristics & follow-up treatment sequences. Results: Of the 10,585 IBD patients identified, 4651 had UC & 5934 had CD. Baseline characteristics are described in Table 1. Among AT initiators (UC: 3076; CD: 4043), 79% UC & 84% CD patients received AT-only; the remainder received AT + corticosteroids (CS) and/or IMS. Of the AT initiators, ∼47% UC & ∼40% CD patients received subsequent second-line therapy (Figure 1). Among IMS initiators (UC: 1575; CD: 1891), 58% UC & 62% CD patients were treated with IMS-only; the remainder on IMS+CS and/or AT. Almost 80% UC & 79% CD IMS initiators received subsequent second-line therapy (Figure 1). Conclusion: Whilst there is an armamentarium of options available to treat UC & CD, this real-world study shows that regardless of AT or IMS, many patients receive combination and/or multiple lines of therapy, as previously reported.2 This highlights that a substantial unmet need for a durable, effective, and tolerable treatment option persists. References 1. Wang R, et al. Global, regional and national burden of inflammatory bowel disease in 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019: a systematic analysis based on the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. BMJ Open 2023;13:e065186. 2. Triantafillidis JK, et al. Combination treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: Present status and future perspectives. World J Gastroenterol. 2024 Apr 21;30(15):2068-2080. Disclosures: The study was funded by Teva Pharmaceuticals; publication supported by Teva-Sanofi Alliance.Figure 1.: Second-line treatment regimens. Table 1. - Baseline Characteristics AT Initiatorsa IMS Initiatorsb UC (n=3076) CD (n=4043) UC (n=1575) CD (n=1891) Age Mean (SD) 42 (13.8) 41 (13.8) 43 (13.6) 41 (13.5) Median (IQR) 42 (22.0) 41 (22.0) 43 (22.0) 42 (22.0) Min, Max 18, 86 18, 89 18, 91 18, 91 Sex (n, %) Female 1468 (47.7) 2163 (53.5) 815 (51.7) 1033 (54.6) Male 1608 (52.3) 1880 (46.5) 760 (48.3) 858 (45.4) Region (n, %) North Central 783 (25.5) 1066 (26.4) 424 (26.9) 511 (27.0) Northeast 473 (15.4) 599 (14.8) 231 (14.7) 233 (12.3) South 1427 (46.4) 1907 (47.2) 681 (43.2) 894 (47.3) West 390 (12.7) 463 (11.5) 234 (14.9) 252 (13.3) Unknown 3 (0.1) 8 (0.2) 5 (0.3) 1 (0.1) Index year (n, %) 2017 736 (23.9) 997 (24.7) 505 (32.1) 555 (29.3) 2018 687 (22.3) 980 (24.2) 383 (24.3) 468 (24.7) 2019 753 (24.5) 984 (24.3) 345 (21.9) 431 (22.8) 2020 715 (23.2) 837 (20.7) 275 (17.5) 349 (18.5) 2021 185 (6.0) 245 (6.1) 67 (4.3) 88 (4.7) aTreatments include: adalimumab, certolizumab, infliximab, natalizumab, ustekinumab, golimumab, vedolizumab, tofacitinib.bTreatments include: 6-mercaptopurine, azathioprine, methotrexate, cyclosporine, tacrolimus.AT, advanced therapies; CD, Crohn's disease; IMS, immunosuppressants; IQR, interquartile range; SD, standard deviation; UC, 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · 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→