Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40603860›Full record

Trial reportNature communications2025

Deep molecular profiling of synovial biopsies in the STRAP trial identifies signatures predictive of treatment response to biologic therapies in rheumatoid arthritis.

Myles J Lewis, Cankut Çubuk, Anna E A Surace, Elisabetta Sciacca, Rachel Lau, Katriona Goldmann, Giovanni Giorli, Liliane Fossati-Jimack, Alessandra Nerviani, Felice Rivellese and 2 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Myles J LewisCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. myles.lewis@qmul.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9365-5345
Cankut ÇubukCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4646-0849
Anna E A SuraceCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9589-3005
Elisabetta SciaccaCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7525-1558
Rachel LauCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8330-8048
Katriona GoldmannCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Giovanni GiorliCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Liliane Fossati-JimackCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3757-3999
Alessandra NervianiCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4064-4014
Felice RivelleseCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6759-7521
Costantino PitzalisCentre for Experimental Medicine & Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. c.pitzalis@qmul.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1326-5051
STRAP collaborative group

Funding

DH | National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Barts Biomedical Research CentreDH | NIHR | Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme (NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme) 131575RCUK | Medical Research Council (MRC) MR/K015346/1RCUK | Medical Research Council (MRC) MR/V012509/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximately 40% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis do not respond to individual biologic therapies, while biomarkers predictive of treatment response are lacking. Here we analyse RNA-sequencing (RNA-Seq) of pre-treatment synovial tissue from the biopsy-based, precision-medicine STRAP trial (n = 208), to identify gene response signatures to the randomised therapies: etanercept (TNF-inhibitor), tocilizumab (interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor) and rituximab (anti-CD20 B-cell depleting antibody). Machine learning models applied to RNA-Seq predict clinical response to etanercept, tocilizumab and rituximab at the 16-week primary endpoint with area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values of 0.763, 0.748 and 0.754 respectively (n = 67-72) as determined by repeated nested cross-validation. Prediction models for tocilizumab and rituximab are validated in an independent cohort (R4RA): AUC 0.713 and 0.786 respectively (n = 65-68). Predictive signatures are converted for use with a custom synovium-specific 524-gene nCounter panel and retested on synovial biopsy RNA from STRAP patients, demonstrating accurate prediction of treatment response (AUC 0.82-0.87). The converted models are combined into a unified clinical decision algorithm that has the potential to transform future clinical practice by assisting the selection of biologic therapies.

Indexed as

Antirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidSynovial MembraneAgedAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedBiopsyEtanerceptFemaleGene Expression ProfilingHumansMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedPrecision MedicineRituximabTranscriptomeAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntirheumatic AgentsEtanerceptRituximabtocilizumab

Identifiers

PMID40603860
PMCPMC12223067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.