ArticleArthritis research & therapy2015
Characterising deviation from treat-to-target strategies for early rheumatoid arthritis: the first three years.
Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors influencing delayed attainment of low disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis patients continuing targeted therapy.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2025Observational
- Baseline IgG-Fc N-glycosylation profile is associated with long-term outcome in a cohort of early inflammatory arthritis patients.Arthritis research & therapy · 2022Article
- Challenges in Applying Treat to Target Strategy in Sample of Iraqi Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2021Article
- Maintenance to target was associated with radiological outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a real-world observational cohort study.Clinical rheumatology · 2021Observational
- Characterization of disease course and remission in early seropositive rheumatoid arthritis: results from the TACERA longitudinal cohort study.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2021Article
- Patient and Rheumatologist Perspectives Regarding Challenges to Achieving Optimal Disease Control in Rheumatoid Arthritis.Arthritis care & research · 2020Article
- Physician Adherence to Treat-to-Target and Practice Guidelines in Rheumatoid Arthritis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
- The incidence rate and the early management of rheumatoid arthritis in Slovenia.Clinical rheumatology · 2019Observational
- Timing and Impact of Decisions to Adjust Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients With Active Disease.Arthritis care & research · 2018Observational
- Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients' Motivations for Accepting or Resisting Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Treatment Regimens.Arthritis care & research · 2018Article
- Adherence to combination DMARD therapy and treatment outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis: a longitudinal study of new and existing DMARD users.Rheumatology international · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTreat-to-target (T2T) strategies using a protocol of pre-defined adjustments of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) according to disease activity improve outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, successful implementation may be limited by deviations from the protocol. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of protocol deviation, explore the reasons and identify subsets of patients in whom treatment protocols are more difficult to follow.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, treatment-naïve patients with RA of less than one year's duration, attending a dedicated early arthritis clinic between 2001 and 2013, were followed for three years from initiation of combination therapy with conventional DMARDs which was subsequently modified according to a T2T protocol. At each clinic visit, whether deviation from the protocol occurred, the type of deviation and the reasons for deviation were assessed. The relationship between protocol deviations and baseline variables was determined using linear regression analysis.
resultsIn total, 198 patients contributed 3,654 clinic visits. The prevalence of protocol deviations was 24.5% and deviation in at least at one clinic visit was experienced by 90.4% of patients. The median time to first deviation was 30 weeks. Continuing existing treatment rather than intensifying therapy was the most common type of deviation (59.9%). Patient and physician related factors were the most common reasons for deviation, each accounting for 24.7% of deviations, followed by toxicities (23.3%) and comorbidities (20.0%). The prevalence of protocol deviations was lower among patients who achieved remission after three years (13.1%; 162 deviations out of 1,228 visits) compared with those who were not in remission (30.9%; 523/1692) (P<0.0001). On multivariate analysis, only body mass index (P=0.003) and helplessness score (P=0.04) were independent predictors of protocol deviations although the predictive power of the model was not strong (R2=0.17).
conclusionsDeviation from a T2T protocol occurred in one quarter of visits, indicating that applying the T2T approach is feasible in clinical practice. Failure to escalate dose when indicated was commonly encountered, and just under half of the observed deviations were related to either toxicities or comorbidities and were therefore justifiable on clinical grounds.
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.