Rituximab Treatment for Spondyloarthritis. A Nationwide Series: Data from the AIR Registry of the French Society of Rheumatology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of rituximab (RTX) in several subsets of spondyloarthritis (SpA) using the data of the AIR (Autoimmunity and Rituximab) registry. METHODS: All patients receiving RTX for SpA, and prospectively included in the AIR registry from September 2005 to September 2010, were retrospectively analyzed. The response to treatment was evaluated by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index for axial disease, joint count for peripheral disease, and C-reactive protein reduction. RESULTS: Among the 595 patients included in the AIR registry, 26 patients with SpA from 13 centers were reported: ankylosing spondylitis (10), undifferentiated SpA (7), and psoriatic arthritis (9). Mean disease duration was 8.8 years (range 1-40). The extraarticular features found were psoriasis, 12 cases; uveitis, 4 cases; and Crohn's disease, 3 cases. The mean number of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs before RTX was 2.4; previous anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents were taken in 23 cases. The mean number of RTX courses was 1.5 (range 1-5), with a total of 35.6 patient-years. Efficacy was noted in 11/23 cases: 3 out of 3 anti-TNF-naive patients and 8 out of 20 anti-TNF nonresponder patients. No predictive factors of response could be identified, particularly in diagnosis subsets or clinical presentation (axial or peripheral). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide study of several subsets of SpA, RTX had only a moderate efficacy that was more marked in patients who were anti-TNF-naive.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".