Clinical efficacy of JAK inhibitors on enthesitis in spondyloarthropathy: A scoping literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Enthesitis is a key feature of spondyloarthropathy (SpA). In recent years, JAK inhibitors have emerged as efficacious drugs in the landscape of advanced therapies for patients with SpA. METHOD: The aim of this scoping literature review was to search the published literature for studies on JAK inhibitors and their effects on enthesitis in patients with SpA and evaluate the data and summarise the findings. The clinical trials reviewed used the Leeds Enthesitis Index, Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada Enthesitis Index, and Maastrich Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score as outcome measures. RESULTS: Tofacitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib had numerically greater reductions in the enthesitis scores when compared with placebo. CONCLUSION: While the JAK inhibitors are therapeutic options for enthesitis in SpA, head-to-head studies are needed to compare the JAK inhibitors against the biological drugs (targeting TNF, IL-17, and IL-12/23) as well as studies showing the effects of JAK inhibitors on enthesitis imaging.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".