Two Randomized Trials of Canakinumab in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interleukin-1 is pivotal in the pathogenesis of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). We assessed the efficacy and safety of canakinumab, a selective, fully human, anti-interleukin-1β monoclonal antibody, in two trials. METHODS: In trial 1, we randomly assigned patients, 2 to 19 years of age, with systemic JIA and active systemic features (fever; ≥2 active joints; C-reactive protein, >30 mg per liter; and glucocorticoid dose, ≤1.0 mg per kilogram of body weight per day), in a double-blind fashion, to a single subcutaneous dose of canakinumab (4 mg per kilogram) or placebo. The primary outcome, termed adapted JIA ACR 30 response, was defined as improvement of 30% or more in at least three of the six core criteria for JIA, worsening of more than 30% in no more than one of the criteria, and resolution of fever. In trial 2, after 32 weeks of open-label treatment with canakinumab, patients who had a response and underwent glucocorticoid tapering were randomly assigned to continued treatment with canakinumab or to placebo. The primary outcome was time to flare of systemic JIA. RESULTS: At day 15 in trial 1, more patients in the canakinumab group had an adapted JIA ACR 30 response (36 of 43 [84%], vs. 4 of 41 [10%] in the placebo group; P<0.001). In trial 2, among the 100 patients (of 177 in the open-label phase) who underwent randomization in the withdrawal phase, the risk of flare was lower among patients who continued to receive canakinumab than among those who were switched to placebo (74% of patients in the canakinumab group had no flare, vs. 25% in the placebo group, according to Kaplan-Meier estimates; hazard ratio, 0.36; P=0.003). The average glucocorticoid dose was reduced from 0.34 to 0.05 mg per kilogram per day, and glucocorticoids were discontinued in 42 of 128 patients (33%). The macrophage activation syndrome occurred in 7 patients; infections were more frequent with canakinumab than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: These two phase 3 studies show the efficacy of canakinumab in systemic JIA with active systemic features. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00889863 and NCT00886769.).
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".