Integrated analysis of the safety of fecal microbiota, live-jslm in adults with recurrent <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection from five prospective clinical trials: an update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: infection (rCDI) in adults following standard-of-care (SOC) antibiotic treatment. Objectives: Provide an updated integrated safety analysis, incorporating final safety data from Punch CD3-OLS. Design: Safety data were combined from five RBL trials: three phase II and two phase III trials. Methods: Adult participants had documented rCDI and completed SOC therapy before receiving one or two doses of RBL or placebo, rectally administered as one treatment course. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were recorded for ⩽6 months. Results: TEAEs were reported in 70.9% (845/1192) of RBL recipients; most TEAEs were mild to moderate and gastrointestinal in nature. Most serious TEAEs were related to preexisting conditions or CDI. There was no clustering of serious TEAEs. Most TEAEs leading to death were related to preexisting conditions. Conclusion: Overall, data demonstrate RBL has a favorable 6-month safety profile. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01925417; NCT02299570; NCT02589847; NCT03244644; NCT03931941.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".