Exploring the Effects of Ixekizumab on Pain in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis Based on Objective Measures of Inflammation: Post Hoc Analysis from a Large Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this analysis is to evaluate the improvement in spinal pain with ixekizumab, placebo, and adalimumab based on objective measures of inflammation response in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: The COAST-V 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III trial examined the efficacy of ixekizumab in patients with active AS; adalimumab was used as an active reference arm. Treatment effects on reduction in pain were assessed by objective measures of controlled and persisting inflammation (defined by magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], C-reactive protein [CRP], or MRI + CRP status). Pathway analysis was used to analyze treatment effect that was not attributable to reduction in inflammation biomarkers. RESULTS: In patients with AS, when inflammation was controlled as assessed by MRI, patients treated with ixekizumab experienced a reduction in spinal pain at night (SP-N, numeric rating scale, ixekizumab mean = - 3.9, p < 0.001, adalimumab mean = - 2.6, p < 0.05) compared to placebo (mean = - 1.6) at week 16. When inflammation was controlled as assessed by MRI + CRP, ixekizumab and adalimumab had numerically greater reductions at week 16 in SP-N versus placebo. All ixekizumab groups had further improvements at week 52. When inflammation was persisting as assessed by MRI + CRP, ixekizumab-treated patients had significant reduction in SP-N (mean = - 3.7, p < 0.001) versus placebo (mean = - 1.7), improvement with adalimumab did not reach significance (mean = - 2.6, p = 0.06). In the pathway analysis at week 16, ixekizumab had a greater effect on pain outcomes compared to adalimumab. CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis is supportive of the hypothesis that ixekizumab reduces pain in AS by additional mechanisms other than the reduction of measurable inflammation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02696785.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".