MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2153888522 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.110444

Safety and Effectiveness of Rituximab in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Following an Inadequate Response to 1 Prior Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor: The RESET Trial

2011· article· en· W2153888522 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Boulos Haraoui, Maria Bokarewa, Ian Kallmeyer, Vivian P. Bykerk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalRoche (Canada)Montreal Heart InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical endpointRheumatoid arthritisInternal medicineAdverse effectNauseaSurgeryRituximabPlaceboRheumatologyClinical trialLymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of rituximab (RTX) in combination with methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after failure of a single tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) inhibitor. Changes in patient-reported outcomes after primary treatment or retreatment with RTX and factors determining retreatment in clinical practice were also evaluated. METHODS: In this phase 3b open-label, multicenter trial, patients received 2 slow infusions of RTX 1000 mg 14 days apart after premedication (primary treatment). Patients with a clinically relevant response could receive retreatment between 24 and 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was evaluation of safety. Secondary outcomes were safety of retreatment, effectiveness of primary treatment and retreatment, and changes in patient-reported outcomes after primary treatment or retreatment. RESULTS: Of 120 patients enrolled at 36 centers and receiving primary RTX treatment, 77 received retreatment, 112 completed the 24-week primary treatment period, and 25 completed the 48-week primary treatment and retreatment period following a single course of RTX. The most common adverse events were mild to moderate nausea, vomiting, nasopharyngitis, and headache. No infections or infusion reactions were considered life-threatening. At 24 weeks, 58%, 27%, and 7% of patients achieved American College of Rheumatology 20, 50, and 70 improvements, respectively, and similar improvements were seen after retreatment. CONCLUSION: RTX was well tolerated, with a low incidence of infusion reactions and infections. Efficacy results, including enhanced response in rheumatoid factor-positive patients, were comparable to those reported in the literature. Based on its efficacy and safety profile and retreatment schedule, RTX is an attractive treatment option for patients that have not responded to a single TNF-α inhibitor.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations36
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies→French-language works237,207→