Skip to main content
Fig. 2 | Arthritis Research & Therapy

Fig. 2

From: Assessment of the association of baseline anti-CarbV and anti-MCV antibodies with response to treatment and radiographic progression in an RA population treated with either methotrexate or baricitinib: post-hoc analyses from RA-BEGIN

Fig. 2

Adjusted probabilities for structural damage progression estimated from MLR for six different baseline antibodies. a Anti-CarbV (IgA). b Anti-CarbV (IgG). c Anti-CarbV (IgM). d Anti-MCV (IgA). e Anti-MCV (IgG). f Anti-MCV (IgM). Adjusted ORs for baseline antibodies were converted into corresponding adjusted probabilities of structural progression as a function of baseline antibody serum concentrations. Adjusted probabilities for structural progression (measured as CFB > SDC [1.4]) for the different baseline antibodies were estimated using MLR with continuous covariates fixed at their mean values and categorical covariates fixed at their proportional distribution in the data. a Patients with higher baseline anti-CarbV (IgA) titers were more likely to show structural progression (OR = 1.002), but this association was not statistically significant (p = 0.051). b, c No association between anti-CarbV (IgG) or (IgM) and structural progression was observed (IgG: OR = 1.0; p = 0.665; IgM: OR = 1.001; p = 0.336). df No association between any anti-MCV isotype and structural progression was observed (IgA: OR = 1.000; p = 0.875; IgG: OR = 1.001; p = 0.120; IgM: OR = 1.002; p = 0.207). CarbV, carbamylated vimentin; CFB, change from baseline; Ig, immunoglobulin; MCV, mutated citrullinated vimentin; MLR, multivariable logistic regression; SDC, smallest detectable change; OR, odds ratio

Back to article page