Responses to Adalimumab in Patients with Active Psoriatic Arthritis Who Have Not Adequately Responded to Prior Therapy: Effectiveness and Safety Results From an Open-label Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of adalimumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and an inadequate response to prior therapy. METHODS: Patients were treated with subcutaneous injections of adalimumab 40 mg every other week in addition to their standard antirheumatic therapies in a 12-week, open-label study. Effectiveness evaluations at Week 12 included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response rates, Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC), active dactylitis, enthesitis, and target lesion assessment. Physical function was evaluated using the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI). RESULTS: A total of 127 patients were enrolled. At Week 12, patients achieved ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates of 78.0%, 55.9%, and 21.3%, respectively. PASI50 and PASI75 response rates were 64.7% and 47.1%. A PsARC response was experienced by 70.1% of patients. Between baseline and Week 12, clinically and statistically significant reductions occurred in the mean total plaque score of the target lesion as well as in the percentages of patients with active dactylitis and enthesitis. A mean improvement in HAQ-DI was also observed (-0.44; p < 0.001). Three serious adverse events were reported, but none was considered related to adalimumab therapy. CONCLUSION: Adalimumab-treated patients achieved significant improvements in both skin and joint manifestations of PsA, as well as in physical function. Adalimumab was well tolerated and had a safety profile similar to that observed in other clinical trials of adalimumab for the treatment of PsA. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00427362.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".