MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415456433 · doi:10.3390/jcm14217471

Personalizing IL-23 Inhibitor Therapy in IBD: Current Evidence and Future Directions in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Dose Optimization

2025· review· en· W4415456433 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Pedicelli, Talat Bessissow, Waqqas Afif

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersGilead SciencesCelltrionSanofiAmgenPfizerEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsTherapeutic drug monitoringPharmacokineticsPharmacodynamicsDrugTherapeutic indexInflammatory bowel diseaseClinical PracticeDrug development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interleukin-23 (IL-23) inhibitors have rapidly become an essential component of the therapeutic armamentarium for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Risankizumab, mirikizumab, and guselkumab share broadly similar pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, including linear clearance, long half-lives, and low immunogenicity. While therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is well established in the use of anti-TNF agents, its role in IL-23 inhibitors remains undefined. Emerging evidence, mostly for risankizumab, demonstrates dose-response relationships, suggests potential maintenance thresholds, and outlines possible dose optimization strategies. However, this preliminary data is predominantly retrospective, often single-center, and involves a small number of patients. Until more robust evidence supporting the efficacy of TDM and dose optimization emerges, routine use of this clinical practice in IBD remains investigational.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 Clinical Medicine→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→