ArticleZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2017
[How frequent are poor prognostic markers in rheumatoid arthritis? : An estimate based on three epidemiologic cohorts].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Position paper of the German Society of Rheumatology e.V. (DGRh) regarding the situation of advanced training in the discipline of rheumatology in Germany].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2023Review
- A multicentre validation study of a smartphone application to screen hand arthritis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- [Register and cohort studies : Overview of the most important data sources at the German Rheumatism Research Center].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2020Review
- Long-term trends in rheumatology care : Achievements and deficits in 25 years of the German national rheumatology database.Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2019Review
- [Long-term trends in rheumatology care : Achievements and deficits in 25 years of the German national rheumatology database].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnfavorable prognostic factors-high disease activity, early erosions, and autoantibodies-should be considered when making treatment decisions in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). There are little data on the frequency of individual poor prognostic factors among RA patients in daily care.
methodsDisease activity (Disease Activity Score, DAS28), erosions, antibodies against citrullinated peptides or rheumatoid factor (ACPA/RF+), previous treatment failure, inflammation markers, and functional disability (FFbH < 70) were defined as prognostic factors. Different treatment decision making situations were evaluated in disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve patients from the early RA CAPEA cohort (n = 1059), and in patients from the biologics register RABBIT after failure of one (n = 2217) or more (n = 3280) conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs or one (n = 1134) or more (n = 795) biologic (b)DMARDs. With the national database of German arthritis centers (NDB), the frequency of these factors was analyzed according to treatment strata (no/1
resultsIn DMARD-naïve patients (CAPEA), 50% presented with DAS28 > 5.1, 64% were ACPA/RF+, 13% had erosions, and 37% functional disability (FFbH < 70). In RABBIT, 63 (1
conclusionWith growing numbers of previous DMARD therapies, increasing proportions of patients have poor prognostic factors. This underlines the importance of these factors for a difficult-to-treat disease course.
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.