Antirheumatic Drugs and the Risk of Tuberculosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to quantify the rate of Mycobacterium tuberculosis disease (TB) among a cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to assess whether the independent use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) is associated with the risk of developing TB. METHODS: The study was performed using the PharMetrics Patient-Centric database (PharMetrics). The cohort consisted of all subjects with > or =1 occurrence of a diagnosis of RA during an inpatient or outpatient visit during the period of September 1998 through December 2003. Conditional logistic regression was used in a nested case-control analysis to estimate the rate ratio (RR) of TB with any use of biological or traditional DMARDs during the year before the index date. We also assessed the interaction between DMARDs and the current use of corticosteroids. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 112,300 patients with RA. A total of 386 cases of TB were identified, which resulted in an overall rate of 2.19 cases per 1000 person-years. The adjusted RR of TB for biological DMARD use is 1.5 (95% CI, 1.1-1.9). Use of traditional DMARDs was also independently associated with TB (RR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.5). RRs of developing TB disease with the use of biological or traditional DMARD were lower among current users of corticosteroids than among noncurrent users of corticosteroids. CONCLUSION: We found that the use of biological and traditional DMARDs is associated with an increased risk of developing TB in patients with RA, mainly among noncurrent users of corticosteroids.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".