MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6996047524

Real-World Safety Data from Patients With Rheumatic Diseases Treated With CT-P13, An Infliximab Biosimilar: An Interim Analysis from an Observational Study

2019· article· en· W6996047524 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfliximabObservational studyInterim analysisAdverse effectAnkylosing spondylitisRheumatoid arthritisPneumoniaPsoriatic arthritisTuberculosis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p><strong>Background</strong> CT-P13, an infliximab biosimilar, has been available in Europe and Canada since 2015, and real-world experience with CT-P13 is important to support the safety of this medication. PERSIST is an ongoing, observational cohort study evaluating CT-P13 as treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in a real-world setting.</p> <p><strong>Objectives</strong> This interim analysis reports safety outcomes for patients who received CT-P13 as their first biologic (Biologic-naïve) or who switched from infliximab reference product (IFX-RP) to CT-P13 (Switched) based on data collected from September 2015 to December 2017.</p> <p><strong>Methods</strong> Patients were recruited during usual care at 38 academic and community sites in 6 European countries and Canada. Adult RA, AS or PsA patients prescribed CT-P13 or locally-sourced IFX-RP at the investigator’s discretion and according to the approved label were eligible. Data were analysed descriptively.</p> <p><strong>Results</strong> This analysis included 329 patients (RA, n=134; AS, n=110; PsA, n=85). Of these, 6 (1.8%) were not treated, 3 (0.9%) completed study treatment, 244 (74.2%) were ongoing and 76 (23.1%) discontinued study treatment, most commonly due to lack of response (30 [9.1%]). Demographics and baseline characteristics were generally similar between groups (Table 1). Most treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; Table 2) were of mild or moderate intensity; 7/129 events were severe. Most commonly reported adverse events were related to infection (n=33; 10.2%); most frequently reported infection-related TEAEs were nasopharyngitis (n=6; 1.9%), respiratory tract infection (n=5; 1.5%) and pneumonia (n=4; 1.2%). No case of tuberculosis was reported. Eight (2.5%) patients reported infusion related reactions.</p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford)Same topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207