MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407285832 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwae059.140

A140 DUPILUMAB IMPROVED HISTOLOGY, CLINICAL SYMPTOMS, AND ENDOSCOPIC FEATURES IN ADULTS AND ADOLESCENTS WITH EOSINOPHILIC ESOPHAGITIS THROUGH 52 WEEKS REGARDLESS OF BASELINE DISEASE DURATION: POST-HOC SUBGROUP ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 3 LIBERTY EOE TREET STUDY

2025· article· en· W4407285832 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nirmala Gonsalves, Christoph Schlag, Cecílio Santander, Kathryn Peterson, Razan Alkhouri, C Xia, Bram P. Raphael, Amr Radwan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Esophagitis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEosinophilic esophagitisMedicineDupilumabPost-hoc analysisPost hocSubgroup analysisInternal medicineHistologyDiseaseGastroenterologyDermatologyConfidence intervalAsthma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Limited literature is available on EoE disease duration and response to therapy. Dupilumab is approved for EoE in patients aged ≥12 years, weighing ≥40 kg, in the EU, and in patients aged ≥1 year, weighing ≥15 kg, in the USA and Canada. Aims To assess the long-term efficacy of dupilumab in patients with EoE stratified by baseline disease duration. Methods In Part B of LIBERTY EoE TREET (NCT03633617), patients received 24 weeks of dupilumab 300 mg or placebo weekly (qw). Eligible patients who completed Part B received dupilumab through 52 weeks (Part C). Co-primary endpoints were the proportion achieving peak esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count (PEC) ≤6 eosinophils/high-power field (eos/hpf) and absolute change in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) total score. Secondary endpoints included proportion achieving PEC <15 eos/hpf, percent change in PEC, and mean change in Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS) total score and Histologic Scoring System (HSS) grade/stage scores. Data were stratified by baseline disease duration defined as time since diagnosis (≤5 years, >5-≤10 years, >10 years). Results At Part B baseline in the dupilumab and placebo groups, respectively, 43 and 48 patients had EoE for ≤5 years, 22 and 13 patients had EoE for >5-≤10 years, and 15 and 18 patients had EoE for >10 years. At Week 24, PEC ≤6 eos/hpf and DSQ total score favored dupilumab over placebo, regardless of disease duration. Dupilumab also improved percent change in PEC and change in EREFS and HSS grade/stage scores across all disease duration subgroups vs placebo (Table). At Week 52, improvements were maintained in patients who received continued dupilumab; patients who switched from placebo to dupilumab at Week 24 also showed improvement in all outcomes. Overall safety was consistent with the known dupilumab safety profile. Conclusions These results show that dupilumab 300 mg qw is an effective long-term treatment for patients with EoE, including a subset of patients with longstanding disease potentially inadequately addressed by alternative therapies. Funding Agencies Research sponsored by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicEosinophilic EsophagitisFrench-language works237,207