Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21926153›Full record

Trial reportRheumatology (Oxford, England)2011

Retreatment with rituximab based on a treatment-to-target approach provides better disease control than treatment as needed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a retrospective pooled analysis.

Paul Emery, Philip J Mease, Andrea Rubbert-Roth, Jeffrey R Curtis, Ulf Müller-Ladner, Norman B Gaylis, Sarah Williams, Mark Reynard, Helen Tyrrell

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Rituximab for Rheumatoid Arthritis.Rheumatology and therapy · 2015
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Paul EmeryLeeds Institute of Molecular Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds LS7 4SA, UK. p.emery@leeds.ac.uk
Philip J Mease
Andrea Rubbert-Roth
Jeffrey R Curtis
Ulf Müller-Ladner
Norman B Gaylis
Sarah Williams
Mark Reynard
Helen Tyrrell
University of Leeds · GB

Funding

Versus Arthritis 18475
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety profiles of two different rituximab retreatment regimens in patients with RA.

methodsFour hundred and ninety-three RA patients with an inadequate response to MTX recruited into rituximab Phase II/III studies received further courses of open-label rituximab based on two approaches: (i) treatment to target (TT): patients assessed 24 weeks after each course and retreated if not in remission [DAS in 28 joints based on ESR (DAS-28-ESR) ≥ 2.6]; (ii) treatment as needed (PRN): patients retreated at the physician's discretion ≥24 weeks following the first course and ≥16 weeks following further courses, if both swollen and tender joint counts were ≥8. All courses consisted of i.v. rituximab 2 × 1000 mg 2 weeks apart plus MTX. Observed data were analysed according to treatment strategy.

resultsMultiple courses of rituximab maintained or improved responses irrespective of regimen. TT provided tighter control of disease activity with significantly greater improvements in DAS-28-ESR and lower HAQ-disability index scores vs PRN. TT resulted in significantly more patients achieving major clinical response. PRN resulted in recurrence of disease symptoms between courses, with TT significantly reducing the incidence of RA flares. Despite more frequent retreatment with TT compared with PRN, the rates of serious adverse events and serious infections were comparable between regimens.

conclusionsRetreatment with rituximab based on 24-week evaluations and to a target of DAS-28-ESR remission leads to improved efficacy and tighter control of disease activity compared with PRN without a compromised safety profile. TT may be the preferable rituximab treatment regimen for patients with RA.

Indexed as

AdultAntibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-DerivedAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleHumansInfusions, IntravenousMaleMethotrexateMiddle AgedRetreatmentRetrospective StudiesRituximabTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultAntibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-DerivedAntirheumatic AgentsMethotrexateRituximab

Identifiers

PMID21926153
PMCPMC3222846
OpenAlexW2167972526

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.