Trial reportRMD open2025
Deciphering differential biomarkers for anti-interleukin-6 receptor and anti-tumour necrosis factor-α treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis by multiomics analysis.
Trial report in RMD open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02332590 (A Randomized, Double-blind, Parallel-group Study Assessing the Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab Monotherapy Versus Adalimumab Monotherapy in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
A Randomized, Double-blind, Parallel-group Study Assessing the Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab Monotherapy Versus Adalimumab Monotherapy in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio is associated with low muscle mass risk in rheumatoid arthritis: evidence from a hospital-based cohort and NHANES validation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Cross-talk between aging resilience pathways and autoimmunity onset.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify blood-based predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers at different timepoints in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with anti-interleukin-6 receptor (anti-IL-6R) and anti-tumour necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α).
methodsThis study used blood samples from the MONARCH trial (NCT02332590), a randomised, double-blind, phase III trial that compared the safety and efficacy of sarilumab (anti-IL-6R) and adalimumab (anti-TNF-α) monotherapy in patients with RA who were intolerant/inadequate responders to methotrexate. The study evaluated predictive biomarkers to anti-IL-6R and anti-TNF-α treatments at baseline and week 2 and pharmacodynamic biomarkers at week 2 and week 24 using Olink proteomics analysis (n=804 serum samples from 268 patients). Change in gene expression levels (n=522 peripheral blood samples from 261 patients) by both treatments was assessed using RNA sequencing analysis.
resultsSerum biomarkers most predictive to anti-IL-6R were different from those of anti-TNF-α; predictive biomarkers for anti-IL-6R were correlated with innate immune activation and synovial inflammation, while predictive biomarkers for anti-TNF-α seemed to be more T-cell and neutrophil-related. For baseline predictive biomarkers, we had to focus on relative prediction as the absolute prediction performance of single and combination biomarkers using cross-validation was limited. Additionally, the pharmacodynamic effects of anti-IL-6R and anti-TNF-α on biomarkers as well as pathway signatures were distinct.
conclusionThe unbiased analysis of serum proteins identified biomarkers most predictive of anti-IL-6R and anti-TNF-α at different timepoints that could explain the difference in the response rate in patients with RA. Further, both biomarker and pathway results highlighted a differentiated mode of action of both treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.