Maintenance of Low Disease Activity following Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Dose Tapering in Ankylosing Spondylitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editor: Clinicians, patients, and others have shown considerable interest in the subject of tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) dose tapering in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) because of the drug’s high cost and potential for toxicity1,2,3. In the ANSWERS (ANkylosing Spondylitis With Etanercept RegimeS) trial, we demonstrated that over 50% of participants originally treated with etanercept (ETN) 50 mg once weekly (OW) who were then randomized to a tapered dose of ETN 25 mg OW maintained the primary outcome measure … Dr. Gaffney received research grants and speaker/consultancy fees from AbbVie, MSD, Pfizer, Cellgene, Novartis, and UCB. The study described here was done in affiliation with BRITSpA (British Society for Spondyloarthritis). Address correspondence to Dr. K. Gaffney, Rheumatology Department, Norfolk and Norwich University NHS Foundation Trust, Colney Lane, Norwich NR8 5HE, UK. E-mail: karl.gaffney{at}nnuh.nhs.uk
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 | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".