Effect of anti-tumor necrosis factor α treatment on radiographic progression in patient with ankylosing spondylitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Efficacy of anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF)α treatment in patient with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS) had been proved by many clinical studies. Inflammation and new bone formation in spine were two pivotal aspects in AS. TNF α inhibitor could eliminate inflammation including clinical and laboratory inflammatory manifestation. Paradoxical results whether TNF α antagonist could delay radiographic progression in AS were often been reported simultaneously. Objectives: To review the literature about the effect of TNF α inhibitor on radiographic progression and disease activity in patient with AS. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search including Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from 1 January 2000 to 15 August 2017. Two reviewers independently supplemented with hand searching for the reference lists of inclusion. All trials focusing on radiographic progression or disease activity in patients with AS treated with anti-TNF α agents. Primary outcomes were modified Stokes AS Spinal Score (mSASSS), as well as Bath AS disease activity index (BASDAI) and Bath AS functional index (BASFI). Two reviewers independently selected studies and analyzed data. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). We pooled effects recorded on different scales as Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effects models. Results: We included 14 studies of low to moderate risk of bias with 3,186 patients, compared with control group, there was no effect of mSASSS changes (SMD = –0.12, 95% CI: –1.17–0.93, p value = .82, I2 = 95%) and follow-up (SMD = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.21–0.26, p value = .82, I2 = 36%) estimation in anti-TNF α group. However anti-TNF α agent treatment led to remarkable improvements on both Bath AS disease activity index (BASDAI) (SMD = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.22–1.89, p value = .01, I2 = 96%) and Bath AS functional index (BASFI) (SMD = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.24–1.92, p value = .01, I2 = 97%) scores at 12 weeks. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis found no significant effect on delaying radiographic progression in AS treated with TNF α inhibitor, although TNF α inhibitor could do improve significantly disease activity and physical function in AS.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".