The Sex Influence on Response to Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Inhibitors and Remission in Axial Spondyloarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of sex on response to treatment and disease remission in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter study, patients with axSpA, according to the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society (ASAS) criteria for axSpA, and treated with adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, or infliximab, were studied. We compared clinical characteristics, patient-reported outcomes, disease activity, function, and response to treatment in male and female patients with this disease. RESULTS: Three hundred forty patients with axSpA (270 with ankylosing spondylitis, 19 with psoriatic arthritis with axial involvement, and 51 with nonradiographic axSpA) were studied. Male subjects had a significantly higher prevalence of grade IV sacroiliitis, higher levels of serum C-reactive protein, lower Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score, and fatigue when compared with females. Further, Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that the rate of partial remission, ASAS40 response, and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) major improvement, but not ASDAS inactive disease, were significantly lower in female patients. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that female sex was associated with a lower rate of response to treatment and of disease remission in patients with axSpA treated with antitumor necrosis factor-α drugs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".