A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled crossover trial of HUMira (adalimumab) for erosive hand OsteoaRthritis – the HUMOR trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of adalimumab in patients with erosive hand osteoarthritis (OA). METHOD: Patients >50 years old, meeting the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for hand OA, with pain >50 on 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS), morning stiffness >30 min and ≥1 erosive joint on X-ray with synovitis present on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were included in a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled crossover trial. Patients were randomised to adalimumab (40 mg subcutaneous injections every other week) or identical placebo injections for 12 weeks followed by an 8-week washout and then crossed over treatment groups for another 12 weeks. The primary outcome was change in VAS hand pain over 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included change in Australian/Canadian Hand OA Index (AUSCAN) pain, function and stiffness subscales from baseline to 4, 8 and 12 weeks, change in MRI-detected synovitis and bone marrow lesions (BMLs) from baseline to 12 weeks and change in VAS from baseline to 4 and 8 weeks. RESULTS: We recruited 51 patients and 43 were randomised to either Group 1 (N = 18, active then placebo) or Group 2 (N = 25, placebo then active). At 12 weeks there was no difference between the groups on the primary outcome measure (mean decrease in VAS pain of 3.2 mm standard deviation (SD 16.7) for adalimumab vs 0.8 mm (SD 29.6) for placebo). The adjusted treatment effect was -0.7 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.3 to 8.0), P = 0.87. No statistically significant differences were found for any secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Adalimumab did not show any effect on pain, synovitis or BMLs in patients with erosive hand OA with MRI-detected synovitis as compared to placebo after 12 weeks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12612000791831.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".