Enthesitis in patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with secukinumab or adalimumab: a post hoc analysis of the EXCEED study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate enthesitis treatment response, including time to resolution and data from multiple enthesitis instruments, in patients with PsA treated with secukinumab or adalimumab for 52 weeks. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the EXCEED study, patients receiving secukinumab 300 mg or adalimumab 40 mg per the label were grouped by presence or absence of baseline enthesitis based on the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) and the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada Enthesitis Index (SPARCC). Efficacy was assessed according to several enthesitis-related instruments using non-responder imputation for the achievement of enthesitis resolution (LEI/SPARCC = 0), Kaplan-Meier analysis for time to resolution, and as-observed data for other outcomes. RESULTS: Enthesitis was present at baseline in 498 of 851 patients (58.5%) as assessed by LEI and in 632 of 853 patients (74.1%) as assessed by SPARCC. Patients with baseline enthesitis generally presented with greater disease activity. Similar proportions of patients receiving secukinumab or adalimumab achieved resolution of LEI and SPARCC at weeks 24 (secukinumab: LEI/SPARCC, 49.6%/45.8%; adalimumab: LEI/SPARCC, 43.6%/43.5%) and 52 (secukinumab: LEI/SPARCC, 60.7%/53.2%; adalimumab: LEI/SPARCC, 55.3%/51.4%), with comparable mean time to enthesitis resolution. Improvements were similar for both drugs at individual enthesitis sites. Resolution of enthesitis with secukinumab or adalimumab was associated with improvements in quality of life at week 52. CONCLUSION: Secukinumab and adalimumab showed similar efficacy, including time to resolution, with respect to resolution of enthesitis. Inhibition of IL-17 with secukinumab reduced clinical enthesitis similarly to TNF-α inhibition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02745080.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".