Guselkumab Efficacy in Biologic-Naïve Participants with Psoriatic Arthritis and Severe Disease Activity: Post Hoc Analysis of a Phase 3 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate guselkumab efficacy through week 100 in participants with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and severe disease activity or patient global assessment (PtGA). METHODS: This post hoc analysis utilized DISCOVER-2 (NCT03158285) data from 739 biologic-naïve adults with active PsA (≥ 5 swollen/tender joints, C-reactive protein ≥ 0.6 mg/dL) randomized to guselkumab every 4 weeks (Q4W) or at weeks 0 and 4, then every 8 weeks (Q8W); or placebo with crossover to guselkumab Q4W at week 24. Severe disease activity was defined as clinical Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (cDAPSA) > 27, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) ≥ 5.4, and PtGA Arthritis + Psoriasis ≥ 80 mm. Least squares mean (LSM) changes in cDAPSA, PASDAS, and PtGA were estimated with mixed models for repeated measures adjusted for baseline factors. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics among 648 (88%), 639 (86%), and 218 (29%) participants meeting the cDAPSA, PASDAS, and PtGA criteria for severe disease activity, respectively, were generally balanced across cohorts. LSM improvements from baseline with guselkumab Q4W/Q8W vs. placebo were -5.9 (p = 0.3905)/-7.2 (p = 0.0379) for cDAPSA at week 2; -1.5/-1.5 for PASDAS (both p < 0.0001); and -30.0/-32.1 for PtGA at week 8 (both p < 0.01). Differences vs. placebo increased through week 24 in the respective cohorts with guselkumab Q4W/Q8W: -9.8/-9.0, -1.1/-1.1, -24.0/-20.2 (all p < 0.0001). Through week 100 of guselkumab Q4W/Q8W treatment, LSM improvements of 69/74%, 52/54%, and 64/63% from baseline in cDAPSA (-35.9/-35.6), PASDAS (-3.6/-3.7), and PtGA (-56.8, -55.5), respectively, were observed. Regardless of severe disease activity definition, approximately 80% of guselkumab-randomized participants who achieved low disease activity at week 24 maintained this response at week 100. CONCLUSION: In biologic-naïve participants with PsA and severe disease activity, guselkumab demonstrated early and durable clinically meaningful improvements in key PsA domains through 2 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03158285.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".