MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P120 Characteristics and safety outcomes of rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with Amgevita® in the UK using data from a national register

2025· article· en· W4409867653 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A Servín, M. Layne Lillie, Laura C. Coates, Michèle Brunori, Frances Humby

Bibliographic record

VenueLara D. Veeken · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUCB PharmaPfizer UKMedacArthritis SocietyBiogenGilead SciencesPfizerSamsungAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsRegister (sociolinguistics)Rheumatoid arthritisMedicinePhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background/Aims Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that can cause joint damage and impair quality of life. Research advances have led to seven adalimumab (ADL) biosimilars approved in the EU, making it crucial to understand their long-term benefit-risk profiles. This study aims to 1) estimate the clinical characteristics, serious adverse events (SAEs), and outcomes in patients with RA exposed to Amgevita® and 2) to estimate the incidence rates for the same outcomes from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register for Rheumatoid Arthritis (BSRB-RRA) antitumor necrosis factor (TNF) comparison cohort. Methods Results from a crude pharmacovigilance report sent to Amgen on a subset of all Amgevita patients in the BSRBR-RA are presented. The BSRBRRA is a nationwide prospective study for patients with RA receiving biologic treatments, including anti-TNF inhibitors (i.e., adalimumab) and non-TNF biologics, that seeks to evaluate the long-term toxicity of these agents in clinical practice. Eligible participants were men and women ≥16 years of age with RA who registered in the study within 6 months of initiating Amgevita to comprise study cohort (these patients represent one-third of all Amgevita patients recruited into the BSRBR-RA). Descriptive characteristics were calculated for all variables of interest. Summary statistics for continuous variables include the number of patients, mean, median, SD or standard error, minimum, and maximum. Results From 01/01/2019 to 31/03/2022, 307 RA patients treated with Amgevita were enrolled in the registry. The follow-up period for this cohort ended 30/11/2023. The mean (SD) age of the population was 59.7 (12.0) years, 86 (28.0%) of patients identified as male, and mean (SD) disease duration at initiation was 9.9 (9.8) years. Two-thirds of Amgevita patients were biologically naïve and 9.8% were using steroids at Amgevita initiation. Non-adjusted incident rates of SAEs per 1,000 patient years by patient cohort are presented in Table 1. Conclusion These results show crude safety incidence rates for Amgevita patients in the BSRBR-RA, with point estimates similar to the anti-TNF cohort, though the confidence intervals are large due to small patient numbers. Ongoing monitoring of biosimilars is essential to optimize RA treatment and patient care. Disclosure A.E. Servin: Corporate appointments; Amgen. Shareholder/stock ownership; Amgen. M. Lillie: Corporate appointments; Amgen. Shareholder/stock ownership; Amgen. L.C. Coates: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Moonlake, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. M. Brunori: Corporate appointments; Amgen. Shareholder/stock ownership; Amgen. L. Krishnamoorthy: Corporate appointments; Amgen. Shareholder/stock ownership; Amgen. F. Humby: Consultancies; Roche, AbbVie, Genentech, UCB, Novartis. Honoraria; Roche, UCB, Novartis. Member of speakers’ bureau; UCB, Novartis.

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)0.009
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLara D. VeekenSame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207