P277 Assessment of disease activity using RAPID3 and evaluation of treatment effect of guselkumab in patients with PsA: results from a randomised placebo-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background To evaluate the effect of guselkumab (GUS) on Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods In a Phase 2 trial, patients with active PsA and ≥3% body surface area of plaque psoriasis despite current or previous treatment with standard-of-care therapies, including anti-TNFα agents, were randomized 2:1 to receive GUS 100 mg (n = 100) or placebo (PBO, n = 49) subcutaneously at weeks 0, 4, and every 8 weeks (q8w) thereafter through W44. At W16, patients from either group with <5% improvement from baseline in both swollen and tender joint counts were eligible for early escape to open label ustekinumab. At W24, all remaining PBO patients crossed over to receive GUS 100 mg, and then received GUS at W28 and q8w thereafter through W44. RAPID3 (0-30) is derived from the Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) and numerical rating scales (0-10) for pain and patient global assessment. A change of 5.1 in RAPID3 score was identified as the minimally important difference (MID) in PsA, and RAPID3 ≤3.0 was used to define PsA remission. Change in RAPID3 and proportion of patients achieving MID were compared between treatments. Correlations of RAPID3 scores with the PsA Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), GRACE index, Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), and Modified Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (mCPDAI) were evaluated using Spearman correlation. Results The mean (SD) RAPID3 score at baseline was 16.9 (5.19). At W24, patients in the GUS group (n = 100) achieved statistically significantly greater decrease from baseline (improvement) in RAPID3 (-5.81 ± 6.0) than the PBO group (n = 49) (-0.57 ± 5.1, p < 0.001), and 50% of patients in the GUS group vs 20.4% in the PBO group achieved an MID (p < 0.001). Higher RAPID3 remission rate in the GUS than the PBO group (14.0% vs 2.4%, p = 0.022) was observed. The mean ± SD decrease from baseline in RAPID3 was -6.36 ± 6.2 at W24, and -7.48 ± 6.3 at W44 in those who continued GUS (n = 86). Among patients who switched from PBO to GUS at W24 (n = 28), mean ± SD change from baseline (improvement) in RAPID3 was -2.28 ± 5.2 at W24 while on placebo and -7.60 ± 6.6 at W44 after switching to GUS. The RAPID3 score was highly correlated with PASDAS (r = 0.84, p < 0.001), GRACE index (r = 0.89, p < 0.001), DAPSA (r = 0.77 p < 0.001) and mCPDAI (r = 0.65, p < 0.001) at W16. Conclusion GUS-treated PsA patients demonstrated significant improvement in RAPID3 compared to PBO. RAPID3 is simple and feasible to use in routine clinical care, and it correlates well with other comprehensive PsA-specific disease activity measures. Disclosures A. Deodhar: Other; A.D. has been a study investigator for Janssen. B. Kirkham: Other; B.K. has been a study investigator for Janssen. P. Rahman: Other; P.R. has been a study investigator for Janssen. P. Helliwell: Other; P.H. has been a study investigator for Janssen. A.B. Gottlieb: Other; A.G. has been a study investigator for Janssen. W. Boehncke: Other; W.B. has been a study investigator for Janssen. X.L. Xu: Other; X.X. is a Janssen employee. P.C. Gorecki: Other; P.G. is a Janssen employee. C. Han: Other; C.H. is a Janssen employee.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".