Incidence of New-onset and Flare of Preexisting Psoriasis During Rituximab Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis: Data from the French AIR Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Psoriasis could be a paradoxical reaction to tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist therapy and it has been reported with rituximab therapy. Our objective was to assess the rates of new-onset and flare of preexisting psoriasis in patients taking rituximab for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: The nationwide multicenter prospective AutoImmunity and Rituximab (AIR) registry was set up in 2006 by the French Society for Rheumatology to collect data on patients taking rituximab for joint diseases. We identified patients with RA in the registry who had psoriasis listed as an adverse drug reaction, and we obtained additional information from their physicians if needed. We computed the incidence rates of new-onset and flare of preexisting psoriasis according to the rituximab exposure time. RESULTS: Among the 1927 patients in the registry with RA, 2 had new-onset and 5 had flare of preexisting psoriasis after a median followup of 39.2 weeks. Incidence rates were 1.04/1000 person-years (95% CI 0.13 to 3.8) for new-onset psoriasis and 2.6/1000 person-years (95% CI 0.84 to 6.1) for flare of preexisting psoriasis. Rituximab rechallenge in the 2 new-onset cases and in 2 flare cases was not followed by recurrence or exacerbation of psoriasis. Two of the 5 flare cases developed after discontinuation of methotrexate. CONCLUSION: Despite the small number of cases observed, leading to wide CI, the incidence rates in our study do not support a causative role of rituximab therapy in new-onset or flare of preexisting psoriasis in patients with RA.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".