The effects of sprifermin on symptoms and structure in a subgroup at risk of progression in the FORWARD knee osteoarthritis trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess pain outcomes and cartilage thickness change in a subgroup at risk (SAR) of further progression in the FORWARD trial of knee osteoarthritis patients treated with sprifermin. METHODS: Patients were randomised 1:1:1:1:1 to: sprifermin 100 µg every 6 months (q6mo), 100 µg q12mo, 30 µg q6mo, 30 µg q12mo, or placebo for 18 months. SAR was defined as baseline medial or lateral minimum joint-space width (mJSW) 1.5-3.5 mm and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score 40-90 units. Follow-up to 3 years was included in the analysis. Treatment benefit was explored by repeated measures, linear dose-effect trends by timepoint. RESULTS: The SAR comprised 161 (29%) of 549 patients. Mean difference (95% CI) in WOMAC pain at year 3 for sprifermin 100 µg q6mo vs placebo SAR was -8.75 (-22.42, 4.92) for SAR vs 0.97 (-6.22, 8.16) for the intent-to-treat population. SAR placebo patients lost more cartilage over 2 years than the modified ITT (mITT) placebo arm (mean change from baseline, mm [SD]: -0.05 [0.10] vs -0.02 [0.07]). Net total femorotibial joint thickness gain with sprifermin 100 µg q6mo (adjusted mean difference from placebo [95% CI] was similar in the SAR and in the mITT group: 0.06 [0.01, 0.11] vs 0.05 [0.03, 0.07]). CONCLUSIONS: Selection for low mJSW and moderate-to-high pain at baseline resulted in more rapid disease progression and demonstrated translation of structure modification (with maintained net benefit on total cartilage thickness) into symptomatic benefit. This subgroup may represent a target population for future trials. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01919164.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".