ArticleRheumatology international2016
A multicenter report of biologic agents for the treatment of secondary amyloidosis in Turkish rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis patients.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transient elastography measurements of the liver and transplanted kidney in patients with AA amyloidosis: a cross-sectional comparative study.Rheumatology international · 2025Article
- Idiopathic AA amyloidosis presenting with initial abdominal pain: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Frequency of Renal Function Parameter Abnormalities in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis: Real-World Evidence from Clinical Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this multicenter, retrospective study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of biologic therapies, including anti-TNFs, in secondary (AA) amyloidosis patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In addition, the frequency of secondary amyloidosis in RA and AS patients in a single center was estimated. Fifty-one AS (39M, 12F, mean age: 46.7) and 30 RA patients (11M, 19F, mean age: 51.7) with AA amyloidosis from 16 different centers in Turkey were included. Clinical and demographical features of patients were obtained from medical charts. A composite response index (CRI) to biologic therapy-based on creatinine level, proteinuria and disease activity-was used to evaluate the efficacy of treatment. The mean annual incidence of AA amyloidosis in RA and AS patients was 0.23 and 0.42/1000 patients/year, respectively. The point prevalence in RA and AS groups was 4.59 and 7.58/1000, respectively. In RA group with AA amyloidosis, effective response was obtained in 52.2 % of patients according to CRI. RA patients with RF positivity and more initial disease activity tended to have higher response rates to therapy (p values, 0.069 and 0.056). After biologic therapy (median 17 months), two RA patients died and two developed tuberculosis. In AS group, 45.7 % of patients fulfilled the criteria of good response according to CRI. AS patients with higher CRP levels at the time of AA diagnosis and at the beginning of anti-TNF therapy had higher response rates (p values, 0.011 and 0.017). During follow-up after anti-TNF therapy (median 38 months), one patient died and tuberculosis developed in two patients. Biologic therapy seems to be effective in at least half of RA and AS patients with AA amyloidosis. Tuberculosis was the most important safety concern.
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.