Longterm Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneous Tocilizumab Monotherapy: Results from the 2-year Open-label Extension of the MUSASHI Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the longterm safety and efficacy of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ-SC) as monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Of 346 patients who received 24 weeks of double-blind treatment with either TCZ-SC monotherapy, 162 mg every 2 weeks (q2w); or intravenous TCZ (TCZ-IV) monotherapy, 8 mg/kg every 4 weeks; 319 patients continued to receive TCZ-SC q2w in the 84-week open-label extension (OLE) of the MUSASHI study (JAPICCTI-101117). Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity were evaluated for all patients treated with TCZ during 108 weeks. RESULTS: The proportions of patients who achieved American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 responses, low disease activity [28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) ≤ 3.2], or remission (DAS28 < 2.6) at Week 24 were maintained until Week 108. The incidences of adverse events and serious adverse events were 498.3 and 16.9 per 100 patient-years (PY), respectively. The overall safety of TCZ-SC monotherapy was similar to that of TCZ-IV monotherapy. Rates of injection site reactions (ISR) through 108 weeks remained similar to rates through 24 weeks. ISR were mild and did not cause any patient withdrawals. No serious hypersensitivity events (including anaphylactic reactions) occurred. Anti-TCZ antibodies were present in 2.1% of patients treated with TCZ-SC monotherapy. CONCLUSION: TCZ-SC monotherapy maintained a favorable safety profile and consistent efficacy throughout the 108-week study. Like TCZ-IV, TCZ-SC could provide an additional treatment option for 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".