Modulation of Interleukin‐23 Signaling With Guselkumab in <scp>Biologic‐Naive</scp> Patients Versus Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor–Inadequate Responders With Active Psoriatic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We assessed and compared immunologic differences and associations with clinical response to guselkumab, a fully human interleukin (IL)-23p19 subunit inhibitor, in participants with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who were biologic-naive or had inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR). METHODS: Serum biomarker levels at baseline and after treatment with guselkumab 100 mg every 8 weeks were compared between biologic-naive (n = 251) and TNFi-IR (n = 93) subgroups identified in the pooled DISCOVER-1/DISCOVER-2/COSMOS data set. Baseline biomarker levels determined by achievement of week 24 clinical responses (≥75%/90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index [PASI 75/90], Investigator's Global Assessment [IGA] of psoriasis score 0/1 and ≥2-point improvement], ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria [ACR20]) were compared between prior treatment subgroups. RESULTS: Baseline IL-22, TNFα, and beta defensin-2 (BD-2) levels were significantly lower in biologic-naive than in TNFi-IR participants. With guselkumab, week 24 IL-17A, IL-17F, IL-22, serum amyloid A, C-reactive protein, IL-6, and BD-2 levels were significantly reduced from baseline in biologic-naive and TNFi-IR participants (≥1.4-fold difference, nominal P < 0.05). Clinical responders to guselkumab exhibited significantly higher baseline levels of several biomarkers than nonresponders (IL-17A, IL-17F, BD-2 in biologic-naive PASI 90 responders; IL-17A, BD-2 in TNFi-IR IGA 0/1 responders; IL-22, BD-2 in TNFi-IR PASI 90 responders [nominal P < 0.05]) and trended higher in TNFi-IR ACR20 responders. CONCLUSION: Guselkumab modulates IL-23 signaling and provides consistent pharmacodynamic effects in both biologic-naive and TNFi-IR PsA patients. Significantly elevated baseline IL-22, TNFα, and BD-2 levels and associations between baseline IL-22, IL-17A, and BD-2 levels and skin responses to guselkumab suggest greater dysregulation of IL-23/Th17 signaling in patients with TNFi-IR.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".