Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28968862›Full record

Observational studyRheumatology (Oxford, England)2018

Serious infection risk after 1 year between patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with rituximab or with a second TNFi after initial TNFi failure: results from The British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register for Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Lucía Silva-Fernández, Diederik De Cock, Mark Lunt, Audrey S Low, Kath D Watson, BSRBR-RA Contributors Group, Deborah P M Symmons, Kimme L Hyrich

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Infection: Infection risk after switching biologics.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Lucía Silva-FernándezArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Diederik De CockArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Mark LuntArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Audrey S LowArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Kath D WatsonArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
BSRBR-RA Contributors Group
Deborah P M SymmonsArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Kimme L HyrichArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Both TNF inhibitors (TNFi) and rituximab (RTX), a B-cell depleting biologic, can disrupt the immune system in RA. RTX is licensed in Europe for use following TNFi failure. However, safety data on serious infections (SIs) are scarce for RTX in daily practice. This analysis aims to compare the risk of SIs in the first year after a switch to either TNFi or RTX in patients who have failed a first TNFi. Methods: This study included patients with RA registered with the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register (BSRBR-RA) who switched to either a second TNFi or RTX after failing a first TNFi. Patients were followed until first SI, treatment discontinuation, last recorded follow-up or the end of the first year after the switch, whichever came first. SI was defined as requiring hospitalization, intravenous antibiotics or resulting in death. The risk of first SI was compared between TNFi and RTX using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted using propensity scores using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Results: This analysis included 3419 TNFi and 1396 RTX patients contributing 2765 and 1224 person-years (pyrs), respectively. SI occurred in 164 (4.8%) TNFi and 81 (5.8%) RTX patients giving a crude rate of 59 and 66 SI/1000 pyrs, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio for SI was 1.0 (95% CI: 0.7, 1.4). Conclusion: The risk of SIs was comparable over the first year of treatment between TNFi and RTX treatment in patients who had failed a single prior TNFi.

Indexed as

RegistriesSocieties, MedicalAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMorbidityProspective StudiesRituximabTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaUnited KingdomAntirheumatic AgentsRituximabTNF protein, humanTumor Necrosis Factor-alpha

Identifiers

PMID28968862
PMCPMC6105920
OpenAlexW2737674906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.