The Proportion of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Achieving ACR20/50/70; Consistent Patterns of a 60/40/20 as Demonstrated by a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to demonstrate that the proportion of rheumatoid arthritis patients achieving 20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR20/50/70) responses to Food and Drug Administration-approved biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) after an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) and after failure of the first bDMARDs followed a consistent pattern. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in accordance with MECIR (Methodological Expectations for Cochrane Intervention Reviews) standards. Two separate groups of randomized controlled trials were included: the first group included studies with biologic-naive patients who added bDMARD to MTX as intervention arm compared with the placebo plus MTX group. The second group included biologic-irresponsive (IR) patients who used a second bDMARD plus MTX after the first bDMARD failure compared with placebo plus MTX group. Primary outcome was defined as the proportion of rheumatoid arthritis patients achieving ACR20/50/70 responses at 24 ± 6 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies initiated between 1999 and 2017 were included: 15 studies for the biologic-naive group and 6 studies for the biologic-IR group. For the biologic-naive group, the proportions of patients achieving ACR20/50/70 were 61.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58.7%-64.1%), 37.8% (95% CI, 34.8%-40.8%), and 18.8% (95% CI, 16.1%-21.4%), respectively. For the biologic-IR group, proportions of patients achieving ACR20/50/70 were 48.5% (95% CI, 42.2%-54.8%), 27.3% (95% CI, 21.6%-33.0%), and 12.9% (95% CI, 11.3%-14.8%), respectively. CONCLUSION: We were able to systematically demonstrate that ACR20/50/70 responses to biologic-naive follow a consistent pattern of 60%, 40%, and 20%, respectively. We also demonstrated that the ACR20/50/70 responses to a biologic IR follow a certain pattern of 50%, 25%, and 12.5%, respectively.
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 | 0.043 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.044 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".