GuidelineAnnals of the rheumatic diseases2015
Development of EULAR recommendations for the reporting of clinical trial extension studies in rheumatology.
Guideline in Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Summarizing current refractory disease definitions in rheumatoid arthritis and polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis: systematic review.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2021Pooled it
- Discontinuation of non-anti-TNF drugs for rheumatoid arthritis in interventional versus observational studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Pooled it
- Reporting of Research Ethics in Studies Focusing on Foot Health in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis - A Systematic Review.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHREPooled it
- Bimekizumab safety and efficacy in patients with psoriatic arthritis: 3-year results from two phase 3 studies.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Trial
- Mesenchymal stem cells combined with IFN-γ treatment versus mesenchymal stem cells monotherapy: safety and efficacy over five years extension follow-up.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Trial
- Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilar CT-P47 Versus Reference Tocilizumab: 1-Year Results of a Randomised, Active-Controlled, Double-Blind, Phase III Study in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.Clinical drug investigation · 2025Trial
- Efficacy and safety of filgotinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: week 156 interim results from a long-term extension study.RMD open · 2024Trial
- Olokizumab plus methotrexate: safety and efficacy over 106 weeks of treatment.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2024Trial
- Efficacy of baricitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis up to 6.5 years of treatment: results of a long-term study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Efficacy of baricitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis with 3 years of treatment: results from a long-term study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2021Trial
- Risk of opportunistic infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating abatacept: cumulative clinical trial data.Arthritis research & therapy · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Mavrilimumab, a Fully Human Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor Receptor α Monoclonal Antibody: Long-Term Safety and Efficacy in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2018Trial
- Population PK/PD Modeling and Simulation to Predict the Comparative Long-Term Efficacy of Olokizumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Control of Inflammation and Sustained Improvements in Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: Bimekizumab Two-Year Results From Two Phase 3 Studies.ACR open rheumatology · 2026Article
- Bimekizumab Efficacy and Safety in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis with Substantial Skin and Nail Psoriasis to 1 Year.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesOur initiative aimed to produce recommendations on post-randomised controlled trial (RCT) trial extension studies (TES) reporting using European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) standard operating procedures in order to achieve more meaningful output and standardisation of reports.
methodsWe formed a task force of 22 participants comprising RCT experts, clinical epidemiologists and patient representatives. A two-stage Delphi survey was conducted to discuss the domains of evaluation of a TES and definitions. A '0-10' agreement scale assessed each domain and definition. The resulting set of recommendations was further refined and a final vote taken for task force acceptance.
resultsSeven key domains and individual components were evaluated and led to agreed recommendations including definition of a TES (100% agreement), minimal data necessary (100% agreement), method of data analysis (agreement mean (SD) scores ranging between 7.9 (0.84) and 9.0 (2.16)) and reporting of results as well as ethical issues. Key recommendations included reporting of absolute numbers at each stage from the RCT to TES with reasons given for drop-out at each stage, and inclusion of a flowchart detailing change in numbers at each stage and focus (mean (SD) agreement 9.9 (0.36)). A final vote accepted the set of recommendations.
conclusionsThis EULAR task force provides recommendations for implementation in future TES to ensure a standardised approach to reporting. Use of this document should provide the rheumatology community with a more accurate and meaningful output from future TES, enabling better understanding and more confident application in clinical practice towards improving patient outcomes.
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.