Randomized Controlled Trial of Adalimumab in Patients With Nonpsoriatic Peripheral Spondyloarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with active nonpsoriatic peripheral spondyloarthritis (SpA). METHODS: ABILITY-2 is an ongoing phase III, multicenter study of adalimumab treatment. Eligible patients age ≥18 years fulfilled the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) classification criteria for peripheral SpA, did not have a prior diagnosis of psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), or ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and had an inadequate response or intolerance to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive adalimumab 40 mg every other week or matching placebo for 12 weeks, followed by a 144-week open-label period. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving 40% improvement in disease activity according to the Peripheral SpA Response Criteria (PSpARC40) at week 12. This was defined as ≥40% improvement from baseline (≥20-mm absolute improvement on a visual analog scale) in patient's global assessments of disease activity and pain, and ≥40% improvement in at least one of the following features: swollen joint and tender joint counts, total enthesitis count, or dactylitis count. Adverse events were recorded throughout the study. RESULTS: In total, 165 patients were randomized to a treatment group, of whom 81 were randomized to receive placebo and 84 to receive adalimumab. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were generally similar between the 2 groups. At week 12, a greater proportion of patients receiving adalimumab achieved a PSpARC40 response compared to patients receiving placebo (39% versus 20%; P = 0.006). Overall, improvement in other outcomes was greater in the adalimumab group compared to the placebo group. The rates of adverse events were similar in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Treatment with adalimumab ameliorated the signs and symptoms of disease and improved physical function in patients with active nonpsoriatic peripheral SpA who exhibited an inadequate response or intolerance to NSAIDs, with a safety profile consistent with that observed in patients with AS, PsA, or other immune-mediated diseases.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".