ReviewClinical rheumatology2016
Efficacy and safety of combination therapy for preventing bone damage in rheumatoid arthritis.
Review in Clinical rheumatology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of methotrexate and etanercept biosimilar rhTNFR:Fc in Chinese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: A controlled, randomized and multicenter study.Scientific reports · 2020Trial
- Article
- ZAP-70 Regulates Autoimmune Arthritis via Alterations in T Cell Activation and Apoptosis.Cells · 2019Article
- Openness to and preference for attributes of biologic therapy prior to initiation among patients with rheumatoid arthritis: patient and rheumatologist perspectives and implications for decision making.Patient preference and adherence · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The main outcomes of the therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) must be preventing, or at least lessening, the development of structural damage. Biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), targeting tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) or other key steps (IL-1, IL-6, T cells, B cells) in the pathogenesis of RA, have given clues to be effective and safe as treatments for RA, being capable of improving disease activity, ameliorating functional ability and halting joint damage. A large body of evidence, stemming from randomized clinical trials, observational studies, and registries, has shown that the beneficial effects of the bDMARDs become optimal when combined with synthetic (s)-DMARDs, mainly methotrexate (MTX). Despite combination therapy is advocated by the international guidelines for the management of RA, data from the daily standard of care indicate that almost one third of RA patients are treated with bDMARDs as monotherapy. Many reasons may be taken into account to explain this gap from official recommendations, among which the fact that in real-life settings, the assessment of clinical outcomes is exclusively based on clinical indices, disregarding the evolution of bone damage. Furthermore, some bDMARDs have been launched in the market with the official approval to be used as monotherapy. But even for the latter, there is no conclusive proof that monotherapy regimen is comparable to co-therapy with MTX in preventing articular damage. In conclusion, the most recent published data show that combination therapy with bDMARDs and MTX represents the best therapeutic option for the treatment of RA since it can stop or at least slow the progression of disabling structural damage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26581205What 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.