A Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Brodalumab in Subjects with Rheumatoid Arthritis and an Inadequate Response to Methotrexate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of brodalumab, a human monoclonal antibody inhibitor of the interleukin 17 receptor, in subjects with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients (n = 252) with inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) were randomized to receive subcutaneous injections of brodalumab (70 mg, 140 mg, or 210 mg) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology 50% response (ACR50) at Week 12. RESULTS: Demographics and baseline characteristics were generally balanced among treatment groups. At Week 12, ACR50 occurred in 16% (70 mg), 16% (140 mg), 10% (210 mg), and 13% (placebo; all nonsignificant vs placebo) of subjects. No significant treatment effects were observed for the secondary endpoints, including ACR20, ACR70, and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints. Incidences of all adverse events (AE), including serious AE (SAE), were similar across treatment groups. A total of 7 subjects reported SAE during the study (2 in the placebo group and 5 in the brodalumab groups), none of which was treatment related. There was 1 death (cardiopulmonary failure) ∼1 week after the last dose in the 140 mg group. CONCLUSION: Our study failed to find evidence of meaningful clinical efficacy with brodalumab treatment in subjects with RA who had an inadequate response to MTX. These preliminary results do not support further evaluation of brodalumab as a treatment for RA. Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT00950989.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".