Efficacy and safety of Long-term mirikizumab treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe crohn’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 January 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. These studies have received IRB approval. 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).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".