Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18501236›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of medicine2008

Tumor necrosis factor antagonist responsiveness in a United States rheumatoid arthritis cohort.

Jeffrey D Greenberg, Mitsumasa Kishimoto, Vibeke Strand, Stanley B Cohen, Thomas P Olenginski, Thomas Harrington, Shelly P Kafka, George Reed, Joel M Kremer, Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America Investigators

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. NICE guidelines on anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy for RA.Nature clinical practice. Rheumatology · 2009
    Article
  14. Biologic agents-a panacea for inflammatory arthritis or not?International journal of rheumatology · 2009
    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

10 authors.

Jeffrey D GreenbergNew York University Hospital for Joint Diseases, New York, NY 10003, USA. Jeffrey.Greenberg@nyumc.org
Mitsumasa Kishimoto
Vibeke Strand
Stanley B Cohen
Thomas P Olenginski
Thomas Harrington
Shelly P Kafka
George Reed
Joel M Kremer
Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America Investigators

Funding

Prognostic Genetic Biomarkers in Rheumatoid ArthritisK23AR054412 · NIAMS · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI GREENBERG, JEFFREY D · 2007 to 2011
$665k
NIAMS NIH HHS K23 AR054412NIAMS NIH HHS K23AR054412
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe study objective was to investigate responsiveness according to whether patients satisfy eligibility criteria from randomized controlled trials of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists in a multicentered US cohort.

methodsBiologic-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were prescribed TNF antagonists (n=465) in the Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America registry were included. Patients were stratified by whether they met eligibility criteria from 3 major TNF antagonist trials. Two cohorts were examined: Cohort A (n=336) included patients with complete American College of Rheumatology response criteria except acute phase reactants, and cohort B (n=129) included patients with complete response criteria. Study outcomes included modified American College of Rheumatology 20% and 50% improvement responses (cohort A) and standard American College of Rheumatology improvement (cohort B).

resultsA minority of patients (5.4%-19.4%) prescribed TNF antagonists met trial eligibility criteria and predominantly had high disease activity (78.5%-100%). For patients who met eligibility criteria in cohort A, rates of 20% improvement (52.3%-63.6%) and 50% improvement (30.8%-45.5%) were achieved. Among patients failing to meet eligibility criteria, rates of 20% improvement (16.2%-20.4%) and 50% improvement (8.9%-10.8%) were consistently inferior (P<.05 all comparisons). For cohort B, similar differences were observed.

conclusionThis multicentered US cohort study demonstrates that the majority of patients receiving TNF antagonists would not meet trial eligibility criteria and achieve lower clinical responses. These findings highlight the tradeoff between defining treatment responsive populations and achieving results that can be generalized for broader patient populations.

Indexed as

AdalimumabAdultAgedAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedArthritis, RheumatoidCohort StudiesEtanerceptFemaleHumansImmunoglobulin GInfliximabMaleMiddle AgedMulticenter Studies as TopicPatient SelectionAdalimumabAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedEtanerceptImmunoglobulin GInfliximabReceptors, Tumor Necrosis FactorTumor Necrosis Factor-alpha

Identifiers

PMID18501236
PMCPMC2587326

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.