Rho-GTPase pathways may differentiate treatment response to TNF-alpha and IL-17A inhibitors in psoriatic arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Biological therapies have dramatically improved the therapeutic landscape of psoriatic arthritis (PsA); however, 40–50% of patients are primary non-responders with response rates declining significantly with each successive biological therapy. Therefore, there is a pressing need to develop a coherent strategy for effective initial and subsequent selection of biologic agents. We interrogated 40 PsA patients initiating either tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or interleukin-17A inhibitors (17Ai) for active PsA. Patients achieving low disease activity according to the Disease Activity Index for PsA (DAPSA) at 3 months were classified as responders. Baseline and 3-month CD4+transcript profiling were performed, and novel signaling pathways were identified using a multi-omics profiling and integrative computational analysis approach. Using transcriptomic data at initiation of therapy, we identified over 100 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) that differentiated IL-17Ai response from non-response and TNFi response from non-response. Integration of cell-type-specific DEGs with protein–protein interactions and further comprehensive pathway enrichment analysis revealed several pathways. Rho GTPase signaling pathway exhibited a strong signal specific to IL-17Ai response and the genes,RAC1andROCKs, are supported by results from prior research. Our detailed network and pathway analyses have identified the rewiring of Rho GTPase pathways as potential markers of response to IL17Ai but not TNFi. These results need further verification.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".