MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P164 Do real-world treatment patterns reflect PsA recommendations? Results from the PRO-SPIRIT study

2025· article· en· W4409899121 on OpenAlexaff
William Tillett, Muhammad K Nisar, Vinod Chandran, Khai Jing Ng, Marcus Ngantcha, Cedric Laedermann, Sebastián Moyano, Rieke Alten, Lars Erik Kristensen

Bibliographic record

VenueLara D. Veeken · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCelgenePfizerEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbAmgen
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background/Aims The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) and the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) developed recommendation sets for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treatment based on current evidence. All biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are equally recommended for peripheral arthritis. Different treatments exist for relevant skin and axial involvement. Interleukin 17 (IL-17) inhibitors (i) and IL-12/23i are recommended over tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) for PsA with significant skin involvement. IL-12/23i are not recommended with axial manifestations. PRO-SPIRIT is the first large sample prospective multi-national observational PsA study. The objective of this study was to report the real-world treatment patterns reflecting PsA recommendations using results from the PRO-SPIRIT study. Methods PRO-SPIRIT enrolled adults with PsA from 2019 to 2022 who initiated or switched to approved biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARD). Treatment groups included TNFi, IL-17Ai, IL-12/23i, IL-23i, Janus kinase (JAKi), and phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE4i). Mode of action (MoA) was at the discretion of the treating physician. Patient demographic, disease activity, treatment characteristics, and clinical and patient-reported outcomes were collected at baseline (BL). Descriptive results are presented. Missing BL values were imputed. Results Analysis includes 1,192 patients with PsA treated by different MoA. Patients with arthritis (defined by swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC) ≥5) were equally distributed across treatment classes except for a lower percentage in PDE4i. Patients receiving IL-17Ai commonly presented with joint, skin, and nail involvement. Patients with higher skin (body surface area (BSA) ≥3%) and nail involvement were more commonly treated by IL-17Ai and IL-23i, less so with JAKi. Patients receiving JAKi presented with more joint and axial, and less skin involvement. After IL-23i, PDE4i had the second highest proportion of patients with nail involvement. PDE4i patients were low and reported less active domain affectation in general. Line of therapy results showed more patients treated with IL-12/23i, JAKi, and IL-17Ai after prior b/tsDMARDs treatment. Conclusion In general, patients had polyarticular disease at BL. Pts with skin and nail involvement were more commonly treated with IL-17Ai and IL-23i over TNFi and JAKi. Patients with axial manifestations were more commonly treated with IL-17Ai and JAKi over IL-12/23i and IL-23i. Findings add to the evidence on real-world PsA treatment patterns and recommendations sets for guiding individualised PsA treatment. Disclosure W. Tillett: Honoraria; AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma. M. Nisar: Honoraria; AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Chugai, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB Pharma. V. Chandran: Grants/research support; AbbVie, and is a consultant for: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma. K. Ng: Shareholder/stock ownership; Employee and shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company. M. Ngantcha: Shareholder/stock ownership; Employee and shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company. C. Laedermann: Shareholder/stock ownership; Employee and shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company. S. Moyano: Shareholder/stock ownership; Employee and shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company. R. Alten: Grants/research support; AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, Galapagos NV, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma. L. Kristensen: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Biogen, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.358
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.108 · 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 topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207