AB1156 METABOLIC DISORDERS AND ABNORMAL DIETARY PATTERNS AND THEIR ASSOCIATION WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS ACTIVITY: THE DIETARY INTERVENTION IN PSA (DIPSA) STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) is associated with obesity and its related metabolic abnormalities. The role of diet as an adjunct therapy in PsA remains unclear. Objectives We aimed to describe the prevalence of cardiometabolic abnormalities and adherence with healthy eating recommendations among patients participating in the DIPSA study and asses their association with measures of disease activity. Methods DIPSA is a randomized controlled trial (NCT04180904) that aims to compare the efficacy of Mediterranean diet and DASH-low caloric diet vs. standard of care as adjunct therapy in patients with PsA who are overweight or obese (BMI>25). Study participants must have Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) score >10 and be on stable therapy. Baseline information on the first 32 patients enrolled in the study (out of expected 90 patients) was analyzed. The presence of cardiometabolic abnormalities was assessed based on medical history, physical examination and laboratory tests. All participants completed a 24-h dietary recall of foods/beverages consumed during 3 separate weekdays. Healthy Eating Index (HEI) 2015, a diet quality score which evaluates adherence to dietary guidelines for Americans, was calculated. The score includes 13 food components (9 components encouraged, 4 to limit) with a range of 0 (low) to 5 or 10 (high). We describe the baseline cardiometabolic abnormalities and adherence with healthy diet scores and assess their correlation with PsA disease activity measures. Results The mean age of study participants was 53.3 years (71.9% females). The mean DAPSA, tender and swollen joint counts were 23.6, 6.6 and 1.1, respectively. A significant proportion of the patients had obesity (71.9%) and related metabolic abnormalities such as dyslipidemia (41.9%), hypertension (37.5%) metabolic syndrome (46.9%). Mean HEI-2015 was 59.3 with higher adherence scores (HEI-2015>50; 25%Q1) found in females than males (91% vs. 57%, respectively, p<0.05). No differences in HEI-2015 scores were found between age and level of education groups. Of the individual HEI-2015 food groups, the lowest adherence scores were found for whole grain and total sodium consumption (Table 1). Significant correlation was found between lower added sugar and both lower fatigue and lower PSAID scores (Figure 1), and correlation between greater whole fruit consumption and lower swollen joint count. Additionally, a correlation was found between the unsaturated than saturated fatty acids and higher enthesitis score. Conclusion High prevalence of metabolic abnormalities was found in patients with PsA starting a diet intervention study. Adherence with healthy diet eating recommendations at baseline was higher in female patients and individual foods, particularly sugar and whole fruit consumption, were associated with PsA measures of disease activity. The DIPSA study will determine the role of dietary interventions as adjunct therapy in PsA. REFERENCES: NIL. Acknowledgements: NIL. Disclosure of Interests Lihi Eder Grant/research support from: Received educational and research grants from Abbvie, UCB, Pfizer, Janssen, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Sandoz, Fresenius Kabi, Charlene Compher: None declared, Helen Emandoilidis: None declared, Ryan Quinn: None declared, Dafna D Gladman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb(BMS), Galapagos, UCB Pharma, Celgene, Vinod Chandran Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Grant/research support from: AbbVie grants, Employee of: Spouse is employee of AstraZeneca, Jose Scher Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen, Pfizer, Alexis Ogdie Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Happify Health, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Harvard Pilgrim, Novartis, and Pfizer. Royalties to husband from Novartis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".