MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

OP40 Duvakitug (TEV-48574), an anti-TL1a monoclonal antibody, demonstrates efficacy and favourable safety as an induction treatment in adults with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease: results from a phase 2b, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-ranging, basket trial (RELIEVE UCCD)

2025· article· en· W4406705372 on OpenAlexaff
Vipul Jairath, Jarosław Kierkuś, George DuVall, Silvio Danese, B E Sands, Bogdan Ratiu-Duma, Ragini Singh, Hadas Barkay, G. Raphael, Walter Reinisch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrohn's diseaseMonoclonal antibodyMonoclonalDiseaseImmunologyInternal medicineAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Duvakitug is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that inhibits TL1A binding to DR3, a key driver of inflammation and fibrosis. In comparison, it has less binding selectivity for DcR3, which regulates excess TL1A, maintaining homeostasis. Duvakitug has demonstrated reduced inflammation and fibrosis in colitis animal models.1 Few data are available for the potential of anti-TL1A therapies in Crohn’s disease (CD). A phase 2b induction basket trial (NCT05499130)2 assessed the efficacy, safety and tolerability of duvakitug in adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis and CD. Methods RELIEVE UCCD was a randomised, placebo (PBO)-controlled, double-blind induction study. The CD cohort comprised of adults with moderately to severely active disease with documented inadequate response, loss of response or intolerance to conventional and/or advanced therapies (ATs). Patients were randomised to receive subcutaneously a 2250 mg loading dose of duvakitug or PBO, followed by either duvakitug 450 mg, 900 mg or PBO (1:1:1; stratified by prior AT) every 2 weeks.2 Primary endpoint was endoscopic response (≥50% reduction from baseline in Simple Endoscopic Score for CD [SES-CD]) at week 14. Safety and tolerability were assessed by adverse event (AE) reporting and laboratory monitoring. Results In total, 138 patients with CD were randomised, treated and included in the analysis (n=46 per arm). Demographics and baseline characteristics were similar across arms (Table 1). Both duvakitug doses achieved the primary endpoint (26% [450 mg], 48% [900 mg] versus 13% [PBO]; PBO-adjusted rates: 13% [450 mg], 35% [900 mg]) with statistically significant endoscopic responses based on the prespecified Bayesian analysis, with a >0.90 posterior probability that each duvakitug dose is superior to PBO. Duvakitug treatment effect was observed in both AT-experienced and -naïve patients (Table 2). AE incidence was similar for duvakitug 900 mg (43%) and PBO (48%), and lower than duvakitug 450 mg (67%). Incidences of AEs leading to discontinuation were 2% each for duvakitug 900 mg and PBO, and 9% for duvakitug 450 mg. Conclusion These are the first data reported for a double-blind, randomised, PBO-controlled induction study of an anti-TL1A antibody in patients with CD. Duvakitug demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful endoscopic response versus PBO with no emergent safety signals observed. These results support further development of duvakitug as a treatment option for patients with moderately to severely active CD. Funding Duvakitug is being developed in partnership between Teva and Sanofi. References 1. Clarke AW, et al. MAbs. 2018;10:664–77. 2. Reinisch W, et al. 19th Congress of European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization (ECCO) 2024; 21–24 February 2024; Stockholm, Sweden. Abstract P998.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207