ArticleZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2014
[Evidence of treatment of chronic inflammation in childhood and adolescence with biologics].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2014. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Current therapy of polyarticular forms of juvenile idiopathic arthritis].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiologics, usually monoclonal antibodies or fusion proteins, are thought to specifically interfere with immunopathogenesis of chronic inflammatory diseases. In order to test these substances also in children and adolescents, financial incentives for manufacturers were created and classification of chronic inflammatory diseases and definition of disease activity, improvement, relapse and remission were established and large international research cooperation projects were founded.
methodsA selective literature search was carried out for treatment of chronic inflammatory diseases in children and adolescents with biologics including current guidelines.
resultsOnly 7 out of 18 prescribed biologics have been approved for children and mostly within narrow limits. The evidence for efficacy is based on four randomized double blind placebo-controlled studies, seven withdrawal studies and seven observational studies. In spite of the limited evidence in comparison to their use in adult patients these substances are broadly used worldwide and have enlarged and substantially improved the therapeutic choices in children when conventional treatment failed or proved to be toxic. Severe adverse events including infections occasionally occur (0.01-0.03 events per patient year) but the rate of malignancies is not obviously increased; however, only two thirds of patients respond to treatment. Improvement is often incomplete, some patients deteriorate and definite termination of drug treatment is possible in only a few patients.
conclusionAs the prescription of biologics has become an important issue of treatment but is based on insufficient evidence data, further studies are necessary in children and adolescents with diseases, such as juvenile idiopathic arthritis, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis and inherited fever syndromes. As many drugs are available these studies can be conducted against verum.
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.