Spinal Radiographic Progression and Predictors of Progression in Patients With Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis Receiving Ixekizumab Over 2 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term effect of ixekizumab (IXE) on radiographic changes in the spine in patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) by measuring change from baseline through 2 years in modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score (mSASSS), and to identify potential predictors of progression. METHODS: This study evaluates patients from COAST-V (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02696785, biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naïve) and COAST-W (NCT02696798, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor-experienced) who had mSASSS data at baseline in the originating studies and 108 weeks after baseline in the extension study COAST-Y (NCT03129100). We examined the proportion of patients who did not have spinal radiographic progression through 2 years (108 weeks) of treatment with IXE (80 mg every 2 or 4 weeks) and the change from baseline to year 2 in mSASSS. Potential predictors of spinal radiographic progression were also evaluated. RESULTS: Among patients with evaluable radiographs who were originally assigned to IXE (n = 230), mean (SD) change in mSASSS from baseline at year 2 was 0.3 (1.8). The proportion of nonprogressors over 2 years was 89.6% if defined as mSASSS change from baseline < 2 and 75.7% if defined as mSASSS change from baseline ≤ 0. Predictors of structural progression at year 2 (mSASSS change > 0) were age ≥ 40, baseline syndesmophytes, HLA-B27 positivity, and male sex. Week 52 inflammation in Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada spine was also a predictor of radiographic progression at year 2 in patients with magnetic resonance imaging data in COAST-V (n = 109). CONCLUSION: The majority of patients with r-axSpA receiving IXE had no radiographic progression in the spine through 2 years of treatment. Predictors were generally consistent with previous studies.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".