Clinical efficacy of mesalamine in the treatment of the spondyloarthropathies.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Sulfasalazine (SSZ) has been found to have beneficial effects in the treatment of patients with spondyloarthropathy (SpA) with active disease. The effectiveness of SSZ is limited by both idiosyncratic and dose related side effects when treating SpA. Mesalamine is a drug used to treat inflammatory bowel disease. Case reports have suggested potential efficacy in SpA. We investigated the efficacy and safety of the Pentasa formulation of mesalamine in treating SpA. METHODS: Thirty patients with SpA as defined by the European Spondylarthropathy Study Group were recruited from a rheumatology specialty clinic. All subjects began 16 week open label therapy with mesalamine 1500 mg/day. Dose escalation for lack of efficacy was permitted after 8 weeks of therapy. Clinical, physical, and laboratory data were collected at baseline, at 8 weeks, and at the conclusion of the study at 16 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-nine of the 30 patients completed the study. There was clinically and statistically significant improvement in all clinical measures (morning stiffness, night awakenings, quality of sleep, severity of stiffness, severity of pain, Dougados functional index, patient and physician global indices). Joint counts and enthesitis counts improved, but measures of axial flexibility did not. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein also improved over the duration of the study. CONCLUSION: In this population of patients with SpA, mesalamine was well tolerated in the dose range 1500 to 4000 mg/day. Improvements in clinical, physical, and laboratory measures indicate the efficacy of mesalamine in treating SpA.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".