ArticleRheumatology and therapy2019
Comparative Effectiveness of Abatacept Versus Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Are Anti-CCP Positive in the United States Corrona Registry.
Article in Rheumatology and therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01625650 (The Corrona Effectiveness Registry to Study Therapies for Arthritis and Inflammatory Conditions Sub-study), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
The Corrona Effectiveness Registry to Study Therapies for Arthritis and Inflammatory Conditions Sub-study: The Corrona CERTAIN Sub-study
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving rheumatoid arthritis comparative effectiveness research through causal inference principles: systematic review using a target trial emulation framework.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2020Pooled it
- Persistence Among Biologic/JAKi-Naive Medicare Beneficiaries with RA Initiating Synthetic DMARDs.Rheumatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Immunomodulatory Nanoparticles Enable Combination Therapies To Enhance Disease Prevention and Flare Control in Rheumatoid Arthritis.ACS central science · 2025Article
- Anti-citrullinated protein antibody profiles predict changes in disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating biologics.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Comparative effectiveness of abatacept versus TNF inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis patients who are ACPA and shared epitope positive.Advances in rheumatology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Tailored therapeutic decision of rheumatoid arthritis using proteomic strategies: how to start and when to stop?Clinical proteomics · 2023Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of Abatacept vs. Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients who are CCP.Rheumatology and therapy · 2023Article
- Efficacy of Abatacept Versus Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in Anti-citrullinated Protein Antibody-Positive Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from a Korean Nationwide Biologics Registry.Rheumatology and therapy · 2022Article
- Baseline Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibody Status and Response to Abatacept or Non-TNFi Biologic/Targeted-Synthetic DMARDs: US Observational Study of Patients with RA.Rheumatology and therapy · 2022Article
- Comparison of the efficacy and risk of discontinuation between non-TNF-targeted treatment and a second TNF inhibitor in patients with rheumatoid arthritis after first TNF inhibitor failure.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2022Article
- Comparative effectiveness and persistence of TNFi and non-TNFi in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a large paediatric rheumatology centre in the USA.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Association Between Baseline Anti-cyclic Citrullinated Peptide Antibodies and 6-Month Clinical Response Following Abatacept or TNF Inhibitor Treatment: A Real-World Analysis of Biologic-Experienced Patients with RA.Rheumatology and therapy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAnti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs) are highly specific serological biomarkers that are indicative of a poor prognosis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The effectiveness of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) with different mechanisms of action may vary, based on patients' serostatus. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of abatacept versus tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) in patients with RA who were anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody positive (anti-CCP+).
methodsAbatacept or TNFi initiators with anti-CCP+ status (≥ 20 U/ml) at or prior to treatment initiation were identified from a large observational US cohort (1 December 2005-31 August 2016). Using propensity score matching (1:1), stratified by prior TNFi use (0, 1 and ≥ 2), effectiveness at 6 months after initiation was evaluated. Primary outcome was mean change in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score. Secondary outcomes included achievement of remission (CDAI ≤ 2.8), low disease activity/remission (CDAI ≤ 10), modified American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 responses and mean change in modified Health Assessment Questionnaire score.
resultsAfter propensity score matching, the baseline characteristics between 330 pairs of abatacept and TNFi initiators (biologic naïve, n = 97; TNFi experienced, n = 233) were well balanced with absolute value standardized differences of ≤ 0.1. Both overall, and in the biologic-naïve cohort, there were no significant differences in mean change in CDAI score at 6 months. However, in the TNFi-experienced cohort, there was a significantly greater improvement in CDAI score at 6 months with abatacept versus TNFi initiators (p = 0.033). Secondary outcomes showed similar trends.
conclusionsImprovements in clinical disease activity were seen in anti-CCP+ abatacept and TNFi initiators. TNFi-experienced anti-CCP+ patients with RA had more improvement in disease activity with abatacept versus TNFis, whereas outcomes were similar between treatments in the overall population and in biologic-naïve patients.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01625650.
fundingThis study is sponsored by Corrona, LLC and funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Bristol-Myers Squibb funded the publication of this manuscript.
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.