ArticleRheumatology international2011
Safety of biologic agents after rituximab therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of Infection Associated With Subsequent Biologic Agent Use After Rituximab: Results From a National Rheumatoid Arthritis Patient Registry.Arthritis care & research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The safety of other biologic therapies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) following B cell-depletion therapy with rituximab has not been established. This retrospective chart review of patients attending an outpatient rheumatology clinic aimed to assess the incidence of adverse events in patients receiving biologic agents to treat RA after an inadequate response or intolerance to rituximab. The charts of 22 patients (18 female; mean age 59 years) were reviewed. Duration of RA was >2 years. Before rituximab, patients had failed one (n = 10), two (n = 4) or three (n = 7) biologic therapies: 1 patient started on rituximab as a first-line biologic. Eighteen patients stopped rituximab due to an inadequate clinical response, while four patients stopped due to adverse events. The mean time to starting a new biologic after rituximab was 4 months, although five patients were started within 1 month of the last rituximab infusion. Abatacept (41%) was the most common biologic used after rituximab. The mean follow-up time from the last rituximab infusion was 14 months. Adverse events occurring after rituximab therapy, but before initiation of a new biologic, included disseminated herpes zoster and aseptic meningitis (both required hospitalization). Adverse events recorded after starting a new biologic post-rituximab included rash, carbuncle, upper respiratory tract infection, urinary tract infection, pneumonia, and eczema, but none was classified as serious. Most of these events occurred in patients receiving abatacept. In conclusion, in this retrospective analysis, no serious adverse events were recorded in patients who received biologic agents following rituximab therapy.
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.