Subcutaneous abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis: current update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A number of biologic agents have been approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). They have changed the landscape of therapy and demonstrate substantial efficacy with a good safety record. One of these agents is intravenous (i.v.) abatacept (ABA), which has a novel mechanism of action by selectively inhibiting the interaction between T- and antigen-presenting cells. Recently, ABA administered by subcutaneous (s.c.) injection has also been approved for use in RA. In this review, will focus in recent data published in this agent. AREAS COVERED: This paper reviews Phase III clinical trials (ACQUIRE, ACCOMPANY, ALLOW, ATTUNE, AMPLE and AVERT) in terms of clinical efficacy including long-term efficacy, radiographic progression, safety and immunogenicity. EXPERT OPINION: Given the current trend in biologic therapy to s.c. administration, the availability of both i.v. and s.c. ABA provides considerable advantage both to patients and physicians in this competitive environment. The clinical trials have shown comparable efficacy and safety of s.c. ABA to i.v. ABA and others biologics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".