Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Patients Diagnosed with Early Rheumatoid Arthritis in the First Years of the Biologic Treatment Era: A 10-year Prospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study short-term and longterm clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the first decade of the biologic treatment era. METHODS: Patients with early RA diagnosed at a rheumatology outpatient clinic were consecutively enrolled between 1999 and 2001. Data were collected on demographic characteristics, disease activity, patient-reported outcomes, and treatments. Radiographs of hands and feet were performed at baseline and after 2, 5, and 10 years and scored according to the Sharp/van der Heijde method, yielding a modified total Sharp score (mTSS). RESULTS: Mean baseline age for the 94 included patients (36 men and 58 women) was 50.4 years and symptom duration 12.3 months; 67.8% were rheumatoid factor-positive. The proportion of patients in remission and in low, moderate, and high disease activity status was at baseline 4.3%, 1.1%, 35.1%, and 59.6% and at 10 years 52.1%, 20.5%, 27.4%, and 0.0%, respectively. For the period 0-2 years, 62.8% had used prednisolone, 91.5% synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD), and 18.1% biologic DMARD, and for the period 2-10 years the numbers were 50.6%, 89.3%, and 62.7%, respectively. At baseline, 70% of the patients had erosions on radiographs. Mean annual change in mTSS was for 0-2 years 3.4, 2-5 years 1.7, and 5-10 years 1.2. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of our patients with RA diagnosed and treated in the new biologic treatment era achieved a status of clinical remission or low disease activity and had only a minor increase in radiographic joint damage after the first years of followup.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".