Tapering of TNF inhibitors in axial spondyloarthritis in routine care — 2-year clinical and MRI outcomes and predictors of successful tapering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In a 2-year follow-up study of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) in clinical remission who tapered TNF inhibitor (TNFi) treatment according to a clinical guideline, we aimed to investigate the proportion who successfully tapered/discontinued therapy and baseline predictors thereof. The proportion regaining clinical remission after flare and the progression on MRI/radiography were also assessed. METHODS: One-hundred-and-nine patients (78 [72%]/31 [28%] receiving standard and reduced dose, respectively) in clinical remission (BASDAI < 40, physician global score < 40) and no signs of disease activity the previous year tapered TNFi as follows: to two-thirds of standard dose at baseline, half at week 16, one-third at week 32 and discontinuation at week 48. Patients experiencing clinical, BASDAI or MRI flare (predefined criteria) stopped tapering and escalated to previous dose. Prediction analyses were performed by multivariable regression. RESULTS: One hundred and six patients (97%) completed 2 years' follow-up; 55 patients (52%) had successfully tapered: 23 (22%) receiving two-thirds, 15 (14%) half, 16 (15%) one-third dose and 1 (1%) discontinued. In patients at standard dose at baseline (n = 78), lower physician global score was the only independent predictor of successful tapering (odds ratio [OR] = 0.79 [95% CI: 0.64, 0.93]; P = 0.003). In the entire patient group lower physician global score (OR = 0.86 [0.75, 0.98]; P = 0.017), lower Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) Sacroiliac Joint Erosion score (OR = 0.78 [0.57, 0.98]; P = 0.029) and current smoker (OR = 3.28 [1.15, 10.57]; P = 0.026) were independent predictors of successful tapering. At 2 years, 97% of patients were in clinical remission. Minimal changes in imaging findings were observed. CONCLUSION: After 2 years following a clinical guideline, 52% of patients with axSpA in clinical remission had successfully tapered TNFi, only 1% discontinued. Baseline physician global score was an independent predictor of successful tapering.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".