Systematic Review of Adverse Events of IL-1 and IL-6 Inhibitor Use in Pediatrics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Two, relatively new and potent, classes of biologicals are interleukin-6 (IL-6) and interleukin-1 (IL-1) inhibitors. As the use of these biologicals in children is more recent, the nature and incidence of adverse effects in the pediatric population are less well known. We systematically reviewed the available literature to elucidate the risks of IL-1 and IL-6 inhibitor use in the pediatric population. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted including English-language clinical studies of children who received IL-1 or IL-6 inhibitors for therapeutic purposes. Abstracts and full-text screening of manuscripts were carried out by 2 independent reviewers, based on predefined eligibility criteria. Any conflicts between the 2 reviewers were resolved by a third reviewer. Data extracted included characteristics such as intervention (drug, dose, method of administration, frequency), adverse events, and frequency of adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 2707 studies were screened and 38 studies were selected for inclusion. Of these 38 studies, 9 involved canakinumab, 12 involved anakinra, 2 involved rilonacept, 15 involved tocilizumab, and 1 involved an unspecified recombinant IL-6 antagonist. The most common adverse events included infection, local injection site reactions, headache, fever, arthralgia, and rash. There were 557 serious adverse events reported in 2208 patients (rate = 25%). CONCLUSIONS: Risks of biological use should be considered alongside the immunosuppressive benefits when prescribing IL-1 and IL-6 inhibitors in the pediatric population. Few data were available on long-term follow-up of these patients.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".