MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144614005 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.090234

Criteria, Frequency, and Duration of Clinical Remission in Psoriatic Arthritis Patients with Peripheral Involvement Requiring Second-line Drugs

2009· article· en· W2144614005 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fabrizio Cantini, Laura Niccoli, Carlotta Nannini, Emanuele Cassarà, Pietro Pasquetti, Ignazio Olivieri, Carlo Salvarani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rheumatology Supplement · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsoriatic arthritisPeripheralDuration (music)Internal medicineArthritisOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article outlines our case-control, prospective, 6-year followup study to evaluate the frequency of clinical remission and duration of remission episodes in patients with peripheral psoriatic arthritis (PsA). All case patients were consecutive new outpatients with peripheral PsA requiring second-line drugs. Controls were consecutive new outpatients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Modified American College of Rheumatology criteria for RA were used to assess the remission in patients with PsA. One or more episodes of remission occurred in 57/236 (24.1%) PsA patients and in 20/268 (7.5%) controls (p < 0.001). No significant difference was recorded for duration of remissions between the group receiving traditional disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) and the anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) group: 11 +/- 7.2 and 13.3 +/- 8.1 months, respectively (p = NS). The duration of remission after interruption of therapy was 12 +/- 2.4 months for the PsA group and 3 +/- 1.5 months for patients with RA (p < 0.001). No predictor of remission at diagnosis could be determined by multivariate analysis. Based on our findings, remission is possible in up to 24% of patients with peripheral PsA. It is significantly more frequent, but not longer, in patients receiving anti-TNF drugs compared to those treated with traditional DMARD.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rheumatology SupplementSame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207