Design and rationale for the VICTRIVA study: A randomized, double-blind, phase 3b study of vedolizumab in combination with upadacitinib in Crohn's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Remission rates in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) suggest a therapeutic ceiling with one advanced targeted treatment, representing an unmet need. Dual targeted therapy may provide a more effective treatment approach. Methods: The primary objective of VICTRIVA (NCT06227910), a randomized, double-blind, phase 3b trial in biologic-experienced and biologic-naïve adults with CD, is to assess whether vedolizumab combined with upadacitinib induction improves rates of clinical remission and endoscopic response at week (W)12 vs. vedolizumab alone. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to vedolizumab (300 mg at W0, W2, W6, and W10) and either upadacitinib 45 mg or placebo daily. W12 responders will enter the maintenance arm up to W52 (vedolizumab monotherapy every 8 weeks [Q8W] from W14 to W52; Q4W escalation if needed). Patients who lose response during maintenance treatment despite dose escalation will enter the rescue substudy (vedolizumab Q4W plus upadacitinib 45 mg for 12 weeks, then vedolizumab monotherapy in patients who regain response). Assessments include patient-reported outcomes (PROs), CD activity index (CDAI), and Simple Endoscopic Score for CD (SES-CD). Globally, 396 patients (198 in each group) will be enrolled. Of these, a minimum of 50 and maximum of 50 % will be biologic-naïve. Co-primary endpoints are CDAI clinical remission and SES-CD endoscopic response at W12. Key secondary endpoints include PRO2 clinical remission at W12, and CDAI clinical remission, SES-CD endoscopic response, and PRO2 clinical remission at W52. Safety endpoints include the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. Conclusion: VICTRIVA will evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined vedolizumab and upadacitinib induction therapy relative to vedolizumab monotherapy, aiming to break the current therapeutic ceiling. Clinical trials registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06227910.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Methods About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | high |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | high |
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 | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".