Efficacy and Safety of Etrasimod in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis Stratified by Baseline Modified Mayo Score: A Post Hoc Analysis From the Phase 3 ELEVATE UC Clinical Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Etrasimod is an oral, once daily, selective sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P)1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). This post hoc analysis of the ELEVATE UC clinical program describes etrasimod efficacy and safety by patients' baseline disease activity. METHODS: Predefined efficacy endpoints were assessed at week 12 in patients with moderately (modified Mayo score [MMS] 5-7) or severely (MMS 8-9) active UC using pooled data from ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12. Descriptive statistics with 95% CI were calculated. RESULTS: Of 743 patients analyzed, 525 (70.7%) had moderately active and 218 (29.3%) had severely active disease at baseline. At week 12, patients treated with etrasimod showed larger mean percentage reductions (95% CI) in MMS vs placebo, regardless of baseline disease activity (-48.4% [-52.3, -44.4] vs -27.0% [-32.2, -21.7] for moderately active disease and -46.4% [-51.2, -41.5] vs -29.8% [-37.2, -22.3] for severely active disease). Similar proportions of patients with moderately or severely active disease treated with etrasimod vs placebo achieved clinical response at week 12 (61.3% vs 39.8% for moderately active disease and 64.5% vs 30.3% for severely active disease). Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between disease activity subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: At week 12, etrasimod showed greater reductions in disease activity and higher rates of clinical response vs placebo in patients with either moderately or severely active disease at baseline. The safety profile of etrasimod was consistent with the overall trial population and was unimpacted by baseline disease activity. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT03945188; NCT03996369.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".