MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414041548 · doi:10.1055/s-0045-1810733

Efficacy and safety results of tulisokibart re-induction treatment in participants with ulcerative colitis in the Phase 2 ARTEMIS-UC clinical trial

2025· article· en· W4414041548 on OpenAlexaff
Maik Soßdorf, S Hoque, B E Sands, B G Feagan, Mark Yen, Bin Dong, Wei Zhou, Silvio Danese

Bibliographic record

VenueZeitschrift für Gastroenterologie · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUlcerative colitisClinical trialPhases of clinical researchPhase (matter)ColitisAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Tulisokibart is a monoclonal antibody targeting tumor necrosis factor-like cytokine 1A (TL1A), a key regulator of inflammation and fibrosis in ulcerative colitis (UC). The Phase 2 ARTEMIS-UC study showed that a higher percentage of tulisokibart participants achieved clinical remission after 12 weeks compared to placebo [ 1 ]. Objectives: This analysis evaluated the effects of re-induction treatment for participants who did not respond during the initial 12-week induction phase of the study. Methods: Participants (≥18 years) with moderate to severe active UC with conventional/advanced treatment failure were randomized (1:1 ratio) to placebo or 12 weeks of intravenous tulisokibart (1000 mg on Day 1 and 500 mg on Weeks 2, 6, and 10). The study included 2 cohorts based on a genetic diagnostic test assessing response likelihood to anti-TL1A treatment. Cohort 1 included participants stratified by Dx results, while Cohort 2 included only Dx-positive participants. Cohort 1 is used for post-hoc analyses of induction non-responders, defined as those who did not achieve a≥2-point reduction and≥30% in modified Mayo score at week 12 accompanied by a reduction≥1 in rectal bleeding sub score or absolute rectal bleeding subscore≤1 at week 12. Efficacy and safety were assessed at Week 26 after re-induction. Results: In Cohort 1, 67 and 68 participants were randomized to receive placebo or tulisokibart induction treatment, respectively. At Week 14, 41 (placebo) and 21 (tulisokibart) induction non-responders entered re-induction and received 12-week open label tulisokibart treatment. At Week 26, 48% and 63% of participants who received initial 12-week of tulisokibart treatment (total 24-week tulisokibart treatment) and 63% and 76% of participants who received initial 12-week placebo treatment (total 12-week tulisokibart treatment) achieved symptomatic improvement and symptomatic response, respectively. Re-induction with tulisokibart was well tolerated with no serious AEs or discontinuations due to AEs and no new safety signals ( Table ). Conclusions: Re-induction treatment with tulisokibart is effective in participants who did not respond to initial induction treatment. Additionally, up to two tulisokibart induction regimens of 24 weeks is well tolerated with no new safety signals identified ([ Fig. 1 ]). Fig. 1 Publication History Article published online: 04 September 2025 © 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueZeitschrift für GastroenterologieSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207