ArticleJournal of comparative effectiveness research2016
Comparative effectiveness of adalimumab and etanercept for rheumatoid arthritis in the Brazilian Public Health System.
Article in Journal of comparative effectiveness research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lack of association between rheumatoid factor levels and clinical response to certolizumab pegol in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: an observational study.Drugs in context · 2026Article
- Recombinant Proteins: Evolution to their Therapeutic Potential.Protein and peptide letters · 2025Review
- Integrative Review of Managed Entry Agreements: Chances and Limitations.PharmacoEconomics · 2020Review
- Funding and Service Organization to Achieve Universal Health Coverage for Medicines: An Economic Evaluation of the Best Investment and Service Organization for the Brazilian Scenario.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Article
- Medication persistence for psoriatic arthritis in a Brazilian real-world setting.Future science OA · 2019Article
- Barriers for Access to New Medicines: Searching for the Balance Between Rising Costs and Limited Budgets.Frontiers in public health · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aimBiological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are used to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with adalimumab and etanercept the most used bDMARDs in Brazil. This open prospective cohort study evaluated their effectiveness and safety among RA patients in the Brazilian Public Health System given their costs.
methodsThe Clinical Disease Activity Index was primarily used to assess their effectiveness after 6 and 12 months of follow-up. The Health Assessment Questionnaire and EuroQol-5D were also used.
resultsA total of 266 RA patients started treatment with adalimumab or etanercept. Adalimumab was the most widely used bDMARD (70%). In total, 46% achieved remission or low-disease activity at 12 months with no difference in effectiveness between them (p = 0.306). bDMARDs were more effective in patients who had better functionality at treatment onset and had spent longer in education.
conclusionThis real-world study demonstrated that adalimumab and etanercept are equal alternatives for RA treatment and both were well tolerated.
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.