Adalimumab for the Treatment of Adults With Non-Infectious Uveitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four systematic reviews (SRs) and 1 economic evaluation were identified regarding the clinical effectiveness (including safety) and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab in adults with non-infectious uveitis. In adults with active non-infectious uveitis (VISUAL I), adalimumab significantly lowered the risk of treatment failure and significantly improved changes in best-corrected visual acuity, anterior chamber cell grade, and vitreous haze grade. Additionally, the number and rate of adverse events and serious adverse events were greater in the adalimumab group compared to the placebo group. Clinical effectiveness and safety findings from the Japanese sub study (VISUAL I Japan) and data from a randomized controlled trial of a younger adult population (ADUR) demonstrated that adalimumab may have no treatment effect. In adults with inactive non-infectious uveitis (VISUAL II), adalimumab significantly lowered risk of treatment failure; however, adalimumab may have no treatment effect on changes in best-corrected visual acuity, anterior chamber cell grade, and vitreous haze grade. Additionally, the number and rate of adverse events and serious adverse events were variable in the adalimumab versus placebo groups (e.g., number of adverse events was greater in the adalimumab group but the rate of adverse events was higher in the placebo groups). Clinical effectiveness and safety findings from the Japanese substudy (VISUAL II Japan) demonstrated that adalimumab may have no treatment effect. Considering both active and inactive non-infectious uveitis (VISUAL I, VISUAL I [Japan], VISUAL II, VISUAL II [Japan], and ADUR), change in vitreous haze grade improved significantly more in the adalimumab group than the control group. In the perspective of the health care system in the UK, adalimumab (plus systemic corticosteroid and immunosuppressant therapy) is not more cost-effective than systemic corticosteroid and immunosuppressant use alone (modelled by placebo data) in adults with active and inactive non-infectious uveitis influencing the posterior segment (i.e., back of the eye). No evidence-based guidelines regarding the use of adalimumab for the treatment of adults with non-infectious uveitis were identified.
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 | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".