MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411433548 · doi:10.1016/j.ard.2025.06.609

POS1259 THINK OUTSIDE THE JOINTS: THE IMPACT OF REGIONAL AND WIDESPREAD NON-ARTICULAR PAIN ON SYMPTOMS AND FUNCTION IN THE CANADIAN EARLY ARTHRITIS COHORT

2025· article· en· W4411433548 on OpenAlexaffabout
Charis F. Meng, Marie‐France Valois, Jennifer B Caci, Y. Lee, Hugues Allard‐Chamard, Bindee Kuriya, L. Bessette, Glen Hazlewood, Carol Hitchon, C. Thorne, Janet Pope, Gilles Boire, Susan J. Bartlett, V. Bykerk

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Rheumatic Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityResearch CanadaUniversity of ManitobaCanadian Rheumatology AssociationUniversité LavalUniversity of TorontoArthritis Research Centre of CanadaMcGill UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortArthritisPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pain outside the joint or non-articular pain (NAP) is common and persists in a third of patients with early RA, despite treatment [1]. NAP negatively impacts the ability to reach RA remission [1] but often remains unaddressed in RA care [2]. Little is known about how NAP impacts physical function, social participation and other symptoms important to patients with new-onset RA. Objectives: To evaluate the association of NAP, regional and widespread, on patient-reported outcomes (beyond pain scales) in early RA. Methods: Data were from patients with active early RA (symptoms<1 year, CDAI>2.8) enrolled in the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort (CATCH) between Jan/2017-10/2023. Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System(PROMIS)29® measures were obtained during regular assessments. Patients were instructed to indicate any non-joint pain they experienced on a Margolis body pain diagram (BPD) at baseline (BL), and 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. Prespecified NAP patterns were classified based on pain reported in 5 sections (4 quadrants and axial, excluding hands and feet) and grouped as: 1) no NAP (no sections selected on BPD), 2) regional (1-3 sections) or 3) widespread NAP(3+sections) [1, 2]. Adjusted associations between repeated measures of NAP and PROMIS-29 Health Domain T-scores were estimated in separate linear-mixed models adjusted for baseline age, sex, education, smoking, comorbidities, osteoarthritis/back pain, seropositivity and lagged (from previous visit) time-variant RA treatment over the first year of follow-up. Results: The study sample included 472 early RA patients; at baseline, 66% were female, mean(sd) age was 57(14); 72% were seropositive, mean symptoms duration 5.2(2.8) months, mean(sd) CDAI 27.0(14.1); most (79%) received a MTX-inclusive regimen. Over half of patients reported NAP at baseline (n=246, 52%); of these with NAP, 72% (176/246) had regional NAP and 28% (70/246) had widespread NAP (Figure 1 shows prevalence in entire cohort). In adjusted regression analyses, compared to no NAP, regional NAP was associated with worse PROMIS29 T-scores (adjusted regression coefficient [95% confidence interval]): physical function -1.7[-2.4, -1.0], social participation -2.6[-3.5, -1.7], pain interference 3.1[2.2, 4.0], sleep disturbance 1.5[0.7, 2.3], fatigue 2.5[1.6, 3.5], anxiety 1.7[0.9, 2.6] and depression 1.6[0.8, 2.5] (Table 1). Compared to those with no NAP, those with widespread NAP reported the largest effects on social participation, pain interference and fatigue (Table 1). Conclusion: Non-articular pain is common and associated with worse symptoms and function throughout the first year of RA. Widespread NAP was associated with significantly greater and clinically meaningful impacts on symptoms and function and had the largest effects on the ability to participate in social roles and activities and on fatigue. Further research is needed to understand how NAP evolves in early RA and to develop targeted interventions for addressing NAP. Figure 1 Table 1 . REFERENCES: [1] Meng C et al. Characterizing NAP at Early RA Diagnosis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2024 Oct 31. doi: 10.1002/art.43049. PMID: 39482804. [2] Meng C et al. The Association of Patient-Reported NAP with Musculoskeletal Pain Diagnoses and RA Disease Activity [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2024; 76 (supp 9) Acknowledgements: NIL . Disclosure of Interests: Charis Meng: None declared, Marie-France Valois: None declared, Julia Caci: None declared, Yvonne Lee medical writer on author's behalf for Sanofi Genzyme and Eli Lilly, Pfizer Aspire Grant, Hugues Allard-Chamard AstraZeneca, Abbvie, Amgen, Astrazeneca, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Otsuka, Sandoz, Pfizer, Sobi, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Fresenius Kabi, Pfizer, Bindee Kuriya Abbvie, UCB, Pfizer, Louis Bessette Amgen, BMS, Janssen, UCB, Abbvie, Pfizer, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, TEVA, Fresenius Kabi, Sandoz, Organon, Sobi, BMS, Biocon, Pfizer, Glen Hazlewood: None declared, Carol A Hitchon Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Carter Thorne cartho@rogers.com AbbVie, Acccord, BIOGEN, Pfizer, Roche, Medexus, Nordic, Organon, JAMP, Pfizer (Ph4 - observational), no clinical trials in 10 years, Janet Pope AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Certa, Eli Lilly, Frensenius Kabi, Janssen, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Organon, Otsuka, Palleon, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB, Zura DSMB: Astra Zeneca, Horizon, Novartis, AbbVie, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boxer Capital, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion Healthcare, Eli Lilly, Frensenius Kabi, GSK, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi, BMS, Janssen, Mallinckrodt, Pfizer (Seattle Genetics), Gilles Boire Abbvie, Janssen, Lilly, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Teva, Viatris, BMS, Biocon, Pfizer, Susan J. Bartlett Sandoz, Nordic, Vivian Bykerk BMS, Pfizer, Abbvie, ER Squibb & Sons, BMS. © The Authors 2025. This abstract is an open access article published in Annals of Rheumatic Diseases under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Neither EULAR nor the publisher make any representation as to the accuracy of the content. The authors are solely responsible for the content in their abstract including accuracy of the facts, statements, results, conclusion, citing resources etc.

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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Rheumatic Diseases→Same topicHip disorders and treatments→French-language works237,207→