Real‐World Effectiveness of Common Treatment Strategies for Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Results From a Canadian Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Undervaluing the effectiveness of conventional treatments may lead to overtreatment with biologic medications in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Using data from a nationwide inception cohort and strict methods to control bias, the aim of our study was to estimate the real-world effectiveness of simple JIA treatment strategies recommended in current guidelines. METHODS: Children with JIA who were recruited at 16 Canadian centers from 2005 to 2010 were followed for up to 5 years. For each child, all observed treatment changes over time were assessed by independent physicians using prospectively collected data and published response criteria. Success was defined as attainment of inactive disease or maintenance of this state when stepping down treatment; minimally active disease was deemed acceptable for children with polyarticular JIA. Success rates were calculated for treatments tried ≥25 times, and logistic regression analysis identified features associated with success. RESULTS: A total of 4,429 treatment episodes were observed in 1,352 children. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) monotherapy was attempted 697 times, mostly as initial treatment when <5 joints were involved, with a 54.4% success rate (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 50.3-58.6). NSAIDs plus joint injections had a 64.7% success rate (95% CI 59.8-69.7). Adding methotrexate to NSAIDs and/or joint injections (attempted 566 times) had a 60.5% success rate (95% CI 55.7-65.3). In adjusted analyses, each additional active joint reduced chances of success for treatment with NSAIDs (odds ratio [OR] 0.90 [95% CI 0.85-0.94]) and for methotrexate combinations (OR 0.96 [95% CI 0.94-0.99]). Each additional year after disease onset reduced chances of success for treatment with methotrexate combinations (OR 0.83 [95% CI 0.72-0.95]). CONCLUSION: These real-world effectiveness estimates show that conventional nonbiologic treatment strategies that are recommended in current guidelines are effective in achieving treatment targets in many children with JIA.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".