Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15940552›Full record

ReviewClinical rheumatology2005

Have traditional DMARDs had their day? Effectiveness of parenteral gold compared to biologic agents.

Rolf Rau

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical rheumatology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Gold micro-particles for knee osteoarthritis.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2022
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Effects of gold coating on experimental implant fixation.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A · 2009
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rolf RauDepartment of Rheumatology, Evangelisches Fachkrankenhaus, Rosenstrasse 2, 40882, Ratingen, Germany. rrau@uni-duesseldorf.de
Fachklinik 360° · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review tries to answer the question of whether in the face of the recently introduced biologics conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) can still be recommended in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We start with an overview of the oldest conventional DMARD, injectable gold (Au), which was introduced in the treatment of RA in the 1920s. The effect of gold is directed at a number of different sites of the immune system. A significant improvement of clinical and biochemical disease activity parameters as well as an inhibition of X-ray progression has been shown in many studies. Head-to-head comparisons between gold and high-dose methotrexate (MTX) demonstrated no significant difference but some advantages for gold. Since trials comparing biologics with gold will never be performed, an indirect comparison was done by analyzing the results of trials with gold with those with biologics. Conclusions from such comparisons have to be drawn with caution especially since the methodology for performing trials has changed with time. We selected four trials with gold (two open, one placebo-controlled, and one comparison with MTX) and five trials with biologics (three placebo-controlled, one dose escalation study, and one comparison with MTX). In all these trials baseline data regarding swollen joint count (SJC), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were roughly comparable and, with the exception of interleukin (IL)-1 RA, demonstrated a similar improvement of over 50% already after 6 months [with faster onset with tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha blockade]. American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response data were not available for the older gold trials. European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria could be calculated for the Au/MTX trial and were-for these compounds-only slightly inferior to the results with adalimumab. X-ray response is especially difficult to compare across studies. Although an inhibition with Au and MTX could be demonstrated, this occurred-similar to corticosteroid treatment-earlier and more pronounced with TNF-alpha blockers. We confirm the statement of Weinblatt that the most modern DMARDs do not appear to be much better than the oldest one indicating that conventional DMARDs are not outdated. Therefore, a sufficient trial of conventional DMARDs should precede the introduction of treatment with the very expensive biologics.

Indexed as

Antirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidDisease ProgressionDose-Response Relationship, DrugGlucocorticoidsHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsInjections, IntravenousOrganogold CompoundsTreatment OutcomeAntirheumatic AgentsGlucocorticoidsImmunosuppressive AgentsOrganogold Compounds

Identifiers

PMID15940552
OpenAlexW1547405416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.