Efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in patients with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from a phase 3, randomised, double-blind withdrawal trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor tocilizumab for the treatment of patients with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pcJIA). METHODS: This three-part, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind withdrawal study (NCT00988221) included patients who had active pcJIA for ≥6 months and inadequate responses to methotrexate. During part 1, patients received open-label tocilizumab every 4 weeks (8 or 10 mg/kg for body weight (BW) <30 kg; 8 mg/kg for BW ≥30 kg). At week 16, patients with ≥JIA-American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 30 improvement entered the 24-week, double-blind part 2 after randomisation 1:1 to placebo or tocilizumab (stratified by methotrexate and steroid background therapy) for evaluation of the primary end point: JIA flare, compared with week 16. Patients flaring or completing part 2 received open-label tocilizumab. RESULTS: In part 1, 188 patients received tocilizumab (<30 kg: 10 mg/kg (n=35) or 8 mg/kg (n=34); ≥30 kg: n=119). In part 2, 163 patients received tocilizumab (n=82) or placebo (n=81). JIA flare occurred in 48.1% of patients on placebo versus 25.6% continuing tocilizumab (difference in means adjusted for stratification: -0.21; 95% CI -0.35 to -0.08; p=0.0024). At the end of part 2, 64.6% and 45.1% of patients receiving tocilizumab had JIA-ACR70 and JIA-ACR90 responses, respectively. Rates/100 patient-years (PY) of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) were 480 and 12.5, respectively; infections were the most common SAE (4.9/100 PY). CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab treatment results in significant improvement, maintained over time, of pcJIA signs and symptoms and has a safety profile consistent with that for adults with rheumatoid arthritis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00988221.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".