ReviewClinical rheumatology2010
Evaluation of abatacept in biologic-naïve patients with active rheumatoid arthritis.
Review in Clinical rheumatology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Osteoporosis drug therapy strategies in the setting of disease-modifying agents for autoimmune disease.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2013Pooled it
- Disease activity measures at baseline predict structural damage progression: data from the randomized, controlled AMPLE and AVERT trials.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of Biqi capsule in rheumatoid arthritis patients.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2018Article
- Health-related quality of life in patients with long-standing rheumatoid arthritis in the era of biologics: data from the German biologics register RABBIT.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2015Article
- Abatacept and its use in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the Czech Republic-data from the ATTRA registry.Clinical rheumatology · 2013Article
- Advances in rheumatology: new targeted therapeutics.Arthritis research & therapy · 2011Review
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article reviews the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of abatacept plus methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to methotrexate who are naïve to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Data from the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Abatacept in Inadequate Responders to Methotrexate, Abatacept or Infliximab vs Placebo, a Trial for Tolerability, Efficacy, and Safety in Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis, and phase IIb dose-finding trials and their long-term extensions are reviewed. Abatacept plus methotrexate significantly improved clinical responses, physical function, and health-related quality of life compared with methotrexate alone. More patients receiving abatacept plus methotrexate than methotrexate monotherapy achieved a low disease activity state or remission. Radiographic progression of the disease was significantly slowed in the abatacept plus methotrexate arms. Abatacept plus methotrexate was generally well tolerated with no clinically significant safety issues identified. The beneficial effects of abatacept plus methotrexate were sustained long term in extension studies, and no new tolerability or safety issues were evident. Abatacept in combination with methotrexate is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated long-term therapy in biologic-naïve patients with active RA and an inadequate response to methotrexate. Abatacept could be considered as a first-line biologic DMARD in the treatment of RA.
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.