MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409376984 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2025.1561140

Impact of TNF inhibitors on inflammation-associated cognitive dysfunction in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective analysis

2025· article· en· W4409376984 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natalia Mena‐Vázquez, F. Ortiz-Márquez, Teresa Ramírez-García, Celia Gillis-Onieva, Pablo Cabezudo‐García, Aimara García-Studer, Arkaitz Mucientes, José Manuel Lisbona-Montañez, Paula Borregón-Garrido, Patricia Ruiz‐Limón, Sara Manrique‐Arija, Laura Cano-García, Pedro J. Serrano‐Castro, Antonio Fernández‐Nebro

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundación Española de Reumatología
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineInternal medicineHospital Anxiety and Depression ScaleStroop effectRheumatoid arthritisErythrocyte sedimentation ratePhysical therapyMemory spanEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceTrail Making TestCognitionProspective cohort studyOutpatient clinicNeuropsychologyAnxietyDiseasePsychiatryWorking memoryDementia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives To evaluate cognitive improvement in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after 6 months of treatment with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, analyze associated factors, and determine the percentage of patients achieving cognitive improvement. Methods This was a single-center prospective observational study conducted over 12 months on 70 RA patients initiating their first biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) with a TNF inhibitor. Cognitive function was assessed at baseline and after 6 months using validated neuropsychological tests, including the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for global cognitive function, the digit span forward and backward tests for attention and working memory, and the Stroop-W, Stroop-C, and Stroop-CW tests for executive function and processing speed. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Quality of Life-Rheumatoid Arthritis Scale-II (QOL-RA II). Clinical variables, disease activity measured by the 28-joint Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), inflammatory markers including C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and patient-reported outcomes were recorded. Associations with average CRP and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) scores were analyzed throughout the follow-up period. Cognitive improvement was defined as a ≥20% increase in MoCA test scores. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with improvement. Results A total of 70 patients (mean age, 56.2 years; 81.4% female) were included. After 6 months, patients showed significant cognitive improvement in a validated questionnaire, namely, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA test 23.1 ± 3.6 to 24.1 ± 3.3; p = 0.001), particularly in the executive and memory domains. Significant improvements were also observed in the digit span forward test (p = 0.003), digit span backward test (p = 0.021), Stroop-W test (p = 0.040), Stroop-C test (p = 0.014), and Stroop-CW test (p = 0.035). Improvements in the MoCA were associated with educational level (B = 2.628; p < 0.001), average CRP (B = −0.154; p = 0.002), and average HAQ (B = −0.303; p = 0.022). Similar associations were found for the other tests. Conclusion TNF inhibitor therapy in RA patients is associated with significant cognitive improvement, particularly in executive function and memory. These findings highlight the potential cognitive benefits of effective RA treatment and underscore the importance of addressing modifiable risk factors to enhance patient quality of life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207