Observational studyAdvances in therapy2018
Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis with Certolizumab Pegol: Results from PROACTIVE, a Non-Interventional Study in the UK and Ireland.
Observational study in Advances in therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01288287 (A Prospective, Multicentre, Non-interventional, Observational, Cohort Study to Evaluate the Long Term Clinical, Patient Reported and Health Care Resource Utilization Effects of an Early Response to Certolizumab Pegol), which is not on this 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.
A Prospective, Multicentre, Non-interventional, Observational, Cohort Study to Evaluate the Long Term Clinical, Patient Reported and Health Care Resource Utilization Effects of an Early Response to Certolizumab Pegol (Cimzia®) in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients in Daily Clinical Practice in the United Kingdom and Eire.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of Certolizumab-Pegol in Rheumatoid Arthritis, Spondyloarthritis, and Psoriatic Arthritis Based on the BIOPURE Registry: Can Early Response Predict Late Outcomes?Clinical drug investigation · 2019Article
- Effectiveness and safety of certolizumab pegol in rheumatoid arthritis patients in Canadian practice: 2-year results from the observational FαsT-CAN study.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2019Article
- Piggybacked by PEGylation?The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe objective of this non-interventional study was to investigate the long-term safety and effectiveness of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the UK and Ireland.
methodsPatients were prescribed CZP at their physicians' discretion and followed during routine clinical practice for up to 88 weeks. DAS28(ESR) response (defined as at least a 1.2-point reduction from baseline) was measured in the full analysis set (FAS) at week 12, and patients were categorized by week 12 responder status in all subsequent analyses. The primary outcome was DAS28(ESR) response at week 78. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline in DAS28(ESR), HAQ-DI, and RADAI scores at week 78, and EULAR response at week 78. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were recorded for all patients who received at least one dose of CZP.
resultsA total of 149 patients were enrolled, of whom 111 (74.5%) formed the FAS. At week 12, 80 patients (72.1%) were DAS28(ESR) responders and 31 (27.9%) non-responders. Compared to non-responders, a greater proportion of week 12 responders had a DAS28(ESR) response at week 78 (43.8% versus 22.6%). Improvements in DAS28(ESR), HAQ-DI, and RADAI scores were also greater on average among week 12 responders, as was the proportion of patients meeting EULAR criteria. Overall, 9 patients (6.1%) experienced 13 ADRs during the study.
conclusionThese data demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of CZP in adult patients with RA treated during routine clinical practice in the UK and Ireland.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01288287.
fundingUCB Pharma.
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.