ArticleBiologics : targets & therapy2008
Biological therapies for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Lessons from the adult and pediatric experiences.
Article in Biologics : targets & therapy, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of tuberculosis in children with rheumatologic diseases treated with biological agents: A cross-sectional cohort study.Archives of rheumatology · 2023Article
- Analysis of the Immunogenicity from Abatacept-Treated Pediatric Patients With Polyarticular-Course Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Findings From Two Phase III Clinical Trials.ACR open rheumatology · 2022Article
- Biotherapy in juvenile idiopathic arthritis Moroccan patients: a single-center experience.The Pan African medical journal · 2022Article
- A successful treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis with rituximab: A report of two cases.European journal of rheumatology · 2014Article
- Treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a revolution in care.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biologics have advanced the therapy of adult and pediatric arthritis. They have been linked to rare serious adverse outcomes, but the actual risk of these events is controversial in adults, and largely unknown in pediatrics. Because of the paucity of safety and efficacy data in children, pediatric rheumatologists often rely on the adult literature. Herein, we reviewed the adult and pediatric literature on five classes of medicines: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, anakinra, rituximab, abatacept, and tocilizumab. For efficacy, we reviewed randomized controlled studies in adults, but did include lesser qualities of evidence for pediatrics. For safety, we utilized prospective and retrospective studies, rarely including reports from other inflammatory conditions. The review included studies on rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis, as well as juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Overall, we found that the TNF inhibitors have generally been found safe and effective in adult and pediatric use, although risks of infections and other adverse events are discussed. Anakinra, rituximab, abatacept, and tocilizumab have also shown positive results in adult trials, but there is minimal pediatric data published with the exception of small studies involving the subgroup of children with systemic onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis, in whom anakinra and tocilizumab may be effective therapies.
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.