Extension Study of Participants from the Trial of Early Aggressive Therapy in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To follow children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) who had completed at least 6 months of the TRial of Early Aggressive Therapy (TREAT) clinical study for an additional 2 years, describing safety of early aggressive treatment, disease activity, function, and duration of clinical inactive disease (CID) during followup. METHODS: Children were treated as per provider's discretion. Physician, patient/parent, and laboratory measures of disease status as well as safety information were collected at clinic visits every 3 months for up to 2 years. RESULTS: Forty-eight children were followed for a mean of 28 months (range 12-42) beyond the end of the TREAT study. Half of patients were in CID for > 50% of their followup time. Overall, 88% of patients achieved CID at > 1 study visit and 54% achieved clinical remission while taking medication. Six patients were in CID for the duration of the study, and, of those, 2 achieved a full year of clinical remission while not taking medication. Active disease was mild: mean physician's global assessment 2.4, active joint count 3.5, parent global evaluation 2.4, Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire 0.32, erythrocyte sedimentation rate 19 mm/h, and morning stiffness 23 min. There were no serious adverse events or adverse events reported at grade 3 or higher of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. CONCLUSION: Early aggressive therapy in this cohort of patients with polyarticular JIA who had high initial disease activity was associated with prolonged periods of CID in the majority of patients during followup. Those not in CID had low levels of disease activity.
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 | 0.003 | 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".