Safety of Etanercept and Methotrexate in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Hepatitis C Virus Infection: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of therapy with etanercept and methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and mild hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. METHODS: In this prospective open study, 29 patients with active RA were randomly assigned to receive therapy with MTX alone, etanercept alone, or a combination of MTX and etanercept, and monitored up to 54 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety; secondary aims were efficacy as defined by the 44-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS44) and health assessment questionnaire (HAQ). Serum liver enzymes and HCV viral load were serially measured. RESULTS: In the whole cohort, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) serum levels were (mean ± SD) 35 ± 3 at entry, 39 ± 5, 41 ± 7, and 38 ± 4 at 14, 30, and 54 weeks, respectively; alanine aminotransferase (ALT) serum levels were 43 ± 5 at entry, 47 ± 5, 53 ± 9, and 50 ± 6 at 14, 30, and 54 weeks, respectively. HCV viral load was 5.6 ± 0.5 at entry, 5.9 ± 0.6, 5.7 ± 0.3, and 5.6 ± 0.6 at 14, 30, and 54 weeks, respectively. AST and ALT did not significantly change in all 3 arms of treatment, nor did HCV viral load. A significant reduction of DAS44 (p < 0.01) and HAQ (p < 0.04) was detected at 54 weeks compared to baseline. No patient discontinued the therapy because of worsening of liver disease. CONCLUSION: This study showed that patients with RA and chronic HCV and mild hepatitis may be successfully treated with etanercept and MTX without increasing the risk of hepatotoxicity and HCV replication. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01543594.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".