MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010881838 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.090128

Comparative Overview of Safety of the Biologics in Rheumatoid Arthritis

2009· review· en· W2010881838 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Majed Khraishi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rheumatology Supplement · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsNexus Clinical Research (Canada)
FundersBristol-Myers Squibb CanadaBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsMedicineAbataceptRheumatoid arthritisEtanerceptAdalimumabRituximabInfliximabBiologic AgentsAnakinraLymphomaOncologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicineImmunologyDermatologyTumor necrosis factor alphaDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Six biologic agents are currently available in Canada for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA): abatacept, adalimumab, anakinra, etanercept, infliximab, and rituximab. Although they are generally considered to be safe and well tolerated, concerns have been raised regarding the use of biologic therapies in the treatment of RA. The new biologic agents abatacept and rituximab have novel mechanisms of action, and may therefore offer different safety profiles. The most important safety concerns with the biologic therapies remain the increased risk of infection. An increased risk of malignancies, including lymphoma and skin cancer, has been noted in RA trials, but the extent to which each of the biologic therapies contributes to the risk of malignancy has not been clearly defined.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations55
Published2009
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rheumatology SupplementSame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207