Time to response for clinical and patient-reported outcomes in patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with tofacitinib, adalimumab, or placebo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examined the time to clinically meaningful response in patients with active psoriatic arthritis treated with tofacitinib, adalimumab, or placebo switching to tofacitinib. METHODS: Data were from two phase 3 studies, OPAL Broaden (12 months) and OPAL Beyond (6 months). Patients received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), adalimumab 40 mg once every 2 weeks (OPAL Broaden only), or placebo switching to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID at month 3. Baseline to initial response time was according to pre-defined clinically meaningful criteria on Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI; ≥ 0.35-point improvement), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F; ≥ 4-point improvement), Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS; post-baseline score ≤ 3.2 and > 1.6-point improvement from baseline), and minimal disease activity (MDA; meeting at least 5 of 7 criteria) composite. RESULTS: In OPAL Broaden, median time to initial HAQ-DI score response was 29, 53, and 30 days in patients treated with tofacitinib 5 mg BID, tofacitinib 10 mg BID, or adalimumab, compared with 162 and 112 days in patients treated with placebo switching to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID at month 3, respectively. Across studies, median time to initial FACIT-F total score response was shorter in patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg BID (31 days) vs other groups (84-92 days). Median time to initial response was approximately 11 (MDA)/6-9 months (PASDAS) in tofacitinib/adalimumab groups in OPAL Broaden. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrates tofacitinib's efficacy on most patient-reported and clinical endpoints over time and shows a shorter time to initial, clinically meaningful response in patients receiving tofacitinib vs patients switching from placebo to tofacitinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01877668. Registered June 12, 2013. ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01882439. Registered June 18, 2013.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".