MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3046917023 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.190999

How Can We Improve the Use of Established Therapies in PsA?

2020· letter· en· W3046917023 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter Nash

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsoriatic arthritisRheumatoid arthritisImmunogenicityBiosimilarInternal medicineMethotrexateDrugRheumatologyOncologySurgeryPharmacologyImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Just because nobody complains it doesn’t mean all parachutes are perfect. — Benny Hill While there has been an expansion in therapeutic targets and a renaissance of novel therapies in psoriatic arthritis (PsA)1, the efficacy and safety of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in PsA have long been established2,3. With an influx of “cheaper” biosimilars attractive to regulators and reimbursers, it behooves rheumatologists spoiled with choice to maximize efficient use of readily accessible agents. Immunogenicity due to anti-drug antibodies (ADAb) in TNFi therapy has been shown to affect drug levels and subsequently to affect clinical response in rheumatoid arthritis (RA)4 and inflammatory bowel disease5. In turn it affects safety, inducing infusion and injection site reactions (ISR), but the issue has been less well studied in patients with PsA. Evidence from RA studies has shown that the combination of methotrexate (MTX) with TNFi reduces immunogenicity, significantly prolonging drug survival6. PsA data comparing monotherapy and combination therapy from Swedish and Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America registries examining drug survival as a … Address correspondence to Dr. P. Nash, Griffith University, Medicine, PO Box 308, Sunshine Coast, Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia. E-mail: drpnash{at}tpg.com.au

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0220.027
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.011

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments→French-language works237,207→