Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30946065›Full record

ArticleChinese medical journal2019

Clinical deep remission and related factors in a large cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Jia-Jia Liu, Ru Li, Yu-Zhou Gan, Rui-Jun Zhang, Jing Li, Yue-Ming Cai, Jin-Xia Zhao, Hua Liao, Jing Xu, Lian-Jie Shi and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese medical journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

17 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Jia-Jia LiuDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Ru LiDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Yu-Zhou GanDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Rui-Jun ZhangDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Jing LiDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Yue-Ming CaiDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518035, China.
Jin-Xia ZhaoDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Hua LiaoDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100129, China.
Jing XuDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing 102206, China.
Lian-Jie ShiDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing 102206, China.
Ji LiDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing 102206, China.
Sheng-Guang LiDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing 102206, China.
Xiao-Lin SunDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Jing HeDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Xu LiuDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Hua YeDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Zhan-Guo LiDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing 100044, China.
Peking University People's Hospital · CNPeking University · CNPeking University International Hospital · CNCapital Medical University · CNCenter for Life Sciences · CNPeking University Shenzhen Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical remission is the treatment target in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study aimed to investigate clinical remission and related factors in a large cohort of patients with RA.

methodsThis study composed of 342 patients with RA. Data were collected by face-to-face interview of 1049 patients with RA who visited the Department of Rheumatology of three teaching hospitals from September 2015 to May 2016. The patients with RA were clinically assessed by rheumatologists and a four-page questionnaire was completed on site. Subsequently, patients fulfilled remission criteria were further analyzed. The practicability of different definitions of remission of RA was rated by a panel of rheumatologists. Sustained intensive disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment was defined as a combination treatment with two or more DMARDs for at least 6 months.

resultsIn this cohort of 342 patients with RA, the proportions of patients achieving remission were 38.0%, 29.5%, 24.9%, 21.1%, 19.0%, 18.1%, and 17.0%, based on criteria of disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28) using CRP (DAS28-CRP), DAS28 using ESR (DAS28-ESR), routine assessment of patient index data 3 (RAPID-3), Boolean, simplified disease activity index (SDAI), clinical disease activity index, and the newly described clinical deep remission (CliDR), respectively. Boolean and CliDR are the best in practicability scored by rheumatologists (7.5 and 8.0, respectively). Compared with the non-sustained intensive group, sustained intensive treatment with DMARDs yielded higher remission rates of 25.6%, 23.8%, and 21.3% in patients with RA based on Boolean (χ = 3.937, P = 0.047), SDAI (χ = 4.666, P = 0.031), and CliDR criteria (χ = 4.297, P = 0.038). The most commonly prescribed conventional synthesized DMARDs (csDMARDs) in patients with RA was leflunomide, followed by methotrexate, and hydroxychloroquine. Compared with the non-remission group, patients achieving remission had a longer median duration of DMARDs (45.0 [22.8-72.3] months, Z = -2.295, P = 0.022).

conclusionsThe findings in this study indicated that clinical deep remission is achievable in patients with RA. Sustained intensive DMARD treatment is needed to achieve a better outcome in RA.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansHydroxychloroquineLeflunomideMaleMethotrexateMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesAntirheumatic AgentsHydroxychloroquineLeflunomideMethotrexate

Identifiers

PMID30946065
PMCPMC6595890
OpenAlexW2934920002

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.