MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2327526281 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.160046

Do Biologic-treated Psoriatic Arthritis Patients with Spondylitis Respond Differently with or without Concomitant Methotrexate from Patients without Spondylitis?

2016· letter· en· W2327526281 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Philip J. Mease

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2016
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Washington
KeywordsMedicinePsoriatic arthritisAdalimumabAnkylosing spondylitisPsoriasisMethotrexateConcomitantTolerabilityRheumatoid arthritisPlaceboInternal medicineRegimenArthritisAdverse effectDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How effective is methotrexate (MTX) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA)? Should we use MTX in combination with biologic therapy in PsA? Does MTX increase therapeutic benefit when used in combination with biologics, either because of its own immunomodulatory effect or its ability to decrease immunogenicity to biologics? Or does MTX not provide additional benefit over and above the biologic agent? Instead, does it contribute only problems from a tolerability and safety perspective? Despite the fact that MTX is the most commonly used immunomodulatory drug in PsA, these questions still have not been satisfactorily answered. A variety of studies sheds light on these questions, but uncertainty remains. In this issue of The Journal , Behrens, et al study a large registry cohort in Germany to attempt to address a corollary question1. Knowing that MTX is not effective in treating the spinal symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis2, they ask the following question: In a cohort of patients with PsA, about half treated with adalimumab (ADA) monotherapy and half with concomitant MTX, if PsA subjects with spondylitis symptoms are analyzed separately from those with peripheral inflammatory musculoskeletal symptoms only, is there any difference in response to 2 years of treatment based on MTX background? There have been few placebo-controlled trials to establish the efficacy of MTX in PsA using the low-dose MTX regimen used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriasis. Neither Willkens, et al nor Kingsley, et al were able to demonstrate benefit of MTX over placebo as assessed by arthritis measures used at the times of those trials, although patient global assessment and some skin measures showed modest improvement3,4,5. Arguably, these were not fair trials in that the first trial studied few patients and included a low-dose arm (7.5 mg as … Address correspondence to Dr. P.J. Mease, Seattle Rheumatology Associates, 601 Broadway, Suite 600, Seattle, Washington 98122, USA. E-mail: pmease{at}philipmease.com

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies→French-language works237,207→