Observational studyInternational journal of rheumatic diseases2018
Retention rates of adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab as first- or second-line biotherapies for spondyloarthritis patients in daily practice in Auvergne (France).
Observational study in International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2018. 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.
- Where we are in treat to target era? Predictive factors for remission and drug switching in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: a real-life evidence from BioStaR nationwide registry.Clinical rheumatology · 2022Article
- Differential retention of adalimumab and etanercept biosimilars compared to originator treatments: Results of a retrospective French multicenter study.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Retention rates of adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab as first- or second-line biotherapies for spondyloarthritis patients in daily practice in Auvergne (France).International journal of rheumatic diseases · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare, in real-life settings, the retention rates of initial anti-tumor-necrosis factor (TNF) treatments (etanercept [ETN], adalimumab [ADA] and infliximab [IFX]) used as first-line biotherapy for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), and evaluate treatment switches to another anti-TNF inhibitor in the event of treatment failure.
methodsWe analyzed the medical records of all SpA patients (Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis International Working Group axial criteria) treated with ETN, IFX or ADA between 2001 and February 2015. Drug retention rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by means of the Cox extended model. Sub-analyses were performed according to discontinuation reasons.
resultsOf the 249 SpA patients analyzed (135 radiographic cases, 114 non-radiographic), 102 received ETN, 62 ADA, and 85 IFX. In total, 103 discontinued treatment. The retention rates of IFX, ADA and ETN were 67%, 59% and 56% after 3 years; 62%, 42% and 47% after 5 years; 55%, 42% and 24% after 8 years; 53%, 42% and 12% after 10 years, respectively. In multivariate analyses, the predictive factors for retention were: low BASDAI score (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.02 [1.01-1.04]), high C-reactive protein levels (HR: 0.98 [0.97-0.99]), concomitant disease-modifying therapy (HR: 0.4 [0.21-0.75]), and radiographic SpA (HR: 1.5 [1.0-2.52]). In total, 61 patients switched to another anti-TNF therapy. No difference was observed among the three anti-TNF therapies regarding median retention duration, although the retention rate proved higher for treatment switches from one monoclonal antibody to another.
conclusionThe retention rate in SpA patients proved high, with retention for IFX superior to that of ETN.
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.