MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116293567 · doi:10.1002/art.27394

Combination antibiotics as a treatment for chronic <i>Chlamydia</i> ‐induced reactive arthritis: A double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, prospective trial

2010· article· en· W2116293567 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis & Rheumatism · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases
KeywordsAzithromycinPlaceboMedicineDoxycyclineChlamydiaInternal medicineChlamydia trachomatisAntibioticsClinical endpointChlamydophila pneumoniaeReactive arthritisAntibacterial agentRandomized controlled trialArthritisGastroenterologyChlamydiaceaeImmunologyMicrobiologyPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Chlamydia trachomatis and Chlamydophila (Chlamydia) pneumoniae are known triggers of reactive arthritis (ReA) and exist in a persistent metabolically active infection state in the synovium, suggesting that they may be susceptible to antimicrobial agents. The goal of this study was to investigate whether a 6-month course of combination antibiotics is an effective treatment for patients with chronic Chlamydia-induced ReA. METHODS: This study was a 9-month, prospective, double-blind, triple-placebo trial assessing a 6-month course of combination antibiotics as a treatment for Chlamydia-induced ReA. Eligible patients had to be positive for C trachomatis or C pneumoniae by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Groups received 1) doxycycline and rifampin plus placebo instead of azithromycin; 2) azithromycin and rifampin plus placebo instead of doxycycline; or 3) placebos instead of azithromycin, doxycycline, and rifampin. The primary end point was the number of patients who improved by 20% or more in at least 4 of 6 variables without worsening in any 1 variable in both combination antibiotic groups combined and in the placebo group at month 6 compared with baseline. RESULTS: The primary end point was achieved in 17 of 27 patients (63%) receiving combination antibiotics and in 3 of 15 patients (20%) receiving placebo. Secondary efficacy end points showed similar results. Six of 27 patients (22%) randomized to combination antibiotics believed that their disease went into complete remission during the trial, whereas no patient in the placebo arm achieved remission. Significantly more patients in the active treatment group became negative for C trachomatis or C pneumoniae by PCR at month 6. Adverse events were mild, with no significant differences between the groups. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that a 6-month course of combination antibiotics is an effective treatment for chronic Chlamydia-induced ReA.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it