Prediction of Clinical Response After 1 Year of Infliximab Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Based on Disease Activity at 3 Months: Posthoc Analysis of the RISING Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the probability of clinical remission (REM) or low disease activity (LDA) after 1 year of infliximab (IFX) therapy based on disease activity at 3 months in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Methotrexate-refractory patients with RA received 3 mg/kg of IFX at weeks 0, 2, and 6, followed by 3 mg/kg, 6 mg/kg, or 10 mg/kg every 8 weeks from Week 14 (W14) to Week 46. Correlation of disease activity at W14 with disease activity at W54 and probability of REM/LDA at W54 were analyzed in each dosing group. RESULTS: Disease activities at W14 were significantly correlated with both disease activity at W54 and probability of REM/LDA at W54 in patients continuing 3 mg/kg as well as in those receiving 6 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg therapy from W14. Results showed that, if approximate REM or LDA had not been achieved by W14, > 50% of patients continuing 3 mg/kg therapy would not be able to achieve REM or LDA at W54. However, even in patients with high or moderate disease activity at W14, dose escalation to 6 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg enabled many to achieve REM/LDA. CONCLUSION: Disease activity at W14 in standard-dose IFX therapy enabled the prediction of longterm clinical response at continued standard dose, as well as subsequent escalated-dose regimens. Disease activity at W14 was hypothesized to be an important index for IFX treatment strategy.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".