ArticleJournal of clinical rheumatology : practical reports on rheumatic & musculoskeletal diseases2019
Experience With the Use of Rituximab for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis in a Tertiary Hospital in Spain: RITAR Study.
Article in Journal of clinical rheumatology : practical reports on rheumatic & musculoskeletal diseases, 2019. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term drug effectiveness and survival for reference rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis patients in an ordinary outpatient clinic.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Factors Determining Retreatment Time Interval of Rituximab in Korean Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment sequences containing tofacitinib for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Spain.Clinical rheumatology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectiveThere is evidence supporting that there are no relevant clinical differences between dosing rituximab 1000 mg or 2000 mg per cycle in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in clinical trials, and low-dose cycles seem to have a better safety profile. Our objective was to describe the pattern of use of rituximab in real-life practice conditions.
methodsRituximab for RA in clinical practice (RITAR) study is a retrospective cohort study from 2005 to 2015. Eligibility criteria were RA adults treated with rituximab for active articular disease. Response duration was the main outcome defined as months elapsed from the date of rituximab first infusion to the date of flare. A multivariable analysis was performed to determine the variables associated with response duration.
resultsA total of 114 patients and 409 cycles were described, 93.0% seropositive and 80.7% women. Rituximab was mainly used as second-line biological therapy. On demand retreatment was used in 94.6% of cases versus fixed 6 months retreatment in 5.4%. Median response duration to on demand rituximab cycles was 10 months (interquartile range, 7-13). Multivariable analysis showed that age older than 65 years, number of rituximab cycles, seropositivity, and first- or second-line therapy were associated with longer response duration. The dose administered at each cycle was not significantly associated with response duration.
conclusionsOur experience suggests that 1000 mg rituximab single infusion on demand is a reasonable schedule for long-term treatment of those patients with good response after the first cycles, especially in seropositive patients and when it is applied as a first- or second-line biological therapy.
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.