ArticleArthritis care & research2016
Risk of Infection Associated With Subsequent Biologic Agent Use After Rituximab: Results From a National Rheumatoid Arthritis Patient Registry.
Article in Arthritis care & research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of opportunistic infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating abatacept: cumulative clinical trial data.Arthritis research & therapy · 2021Trial
- A comprehensive review of rituximab therapy in rheumatoid arthritis patients.Clinical rheumatology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess whether the time between the last rituximab infusion and initiation of a different biologic agent influenced infection risk in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
methodsPatients with RA who newly initiated rituximab within the Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America registry were included if they switched to a nonrituximab biologic agent and had ≥1 followup visit within 12 months of switching. Patients were categorized by duration of time between their last rituximab infusion and initiation of a subsequent biologic agent (≤5 months, 6-11 months, and ≥12 months). The primary outcome was time to first infectious event. Adjusted Cox regression models estimated the association between time to starting a subsequent biologic agent and infection.
resultsA total of 44 overall infections (7 serious, 37 nonserious) were reported during the 12-month followup in the 215 patients included in this analysis (104 switched at ≤5 months, 67 at 6-11 months, and 44 at ≥12 months). Median (interquartile range) time to infection was 4 (2-5) months. Infection rates per patient-year in the ≤5-month, 6-11-month, and ≥12-month groups were 0.34 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.22-0.52), 0.30 (95% CI 0.17-0.52), and 0.41 (95% CI 0.22-0.77), respectively. After adjustment, time to switch to a subsequent biologic agent was not associated with infection, which remained unchanged when number and rate of rituximab retreatments were included in the models.
conclusionIn this real-world cohort of patients with RA, infection rates ranged from 0.30 to 0.41 per patient-year, with no significant difference in the rate between patients who initiated a subsequent biologic agent earlier versus later after rituximab treatment.
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.