ArticleACR open rheumatology2019
Safety of Abatacept Versus Placebo in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Integrated Data Analysis of Nine Clinical Trials.
Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of different pharmacological therapies for diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Abatacept and the risk of malignancy: a meta-analysis across disease indications.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Abatacept and non-melanoma skin cancer in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comprehensive evaluation of randomised controlled trials and observational studies.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Abatacept Plus Standard Treatment for Active Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathy: Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial.Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Trial
- Risk of opportunistic infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating abatacept: cumulative clinical trial data.Arthritis research & therapy · 2021Trial
- Efficacy and safety of abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis patients in Western region in Saudi Arabia: a multi-center study.BMC rheumatology · 2025Article
- State of the Art in Novel Treatment Strategies in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Brief Review.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2025Review
- Safety outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with abatacept: results from a multinational surveillance study across seven European registries.Arthritis research & therapy · 2023Article
- Sustained Long-Term Retention Rates of Abatacept in Combination with Conventional Synthetic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Elderly Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Observational
- Abatacept as salvage therapy in chronic graft-versus-host disease-a retrospective analysis.Annals of hematology · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the safety of abatacept treatment in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using integrated data from multiple clinical trials.
methodsData from nine double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of abatacept treatment (seven intravenous, two subcutaneous) in patients with RA were pooled, focusing on safety events in the double-blind treatment period of each study. Incidence rates (IRs) of adverse events (AEs) per 100 patient-years of exposure were calculated for abatacept- and placebo-treated patients. AEs in abatacept-treated patients were combined regardless of dose and formulation.
resultsIn total, 2653 patients received abatacept and 1485 received placebo, with 2357 and 1254 patient-years of exposure, respectively. The mean (SD) durations of exposure in the abatacept and placebo groups were 10.8 (3.3) and 10.3 (3.5) months, respectively. The IRs (95% confidence interval [CI]) for serious AEs were 14.8 (13.3, 16.5) and 14.6 (12.5, 17.0) in the abatacept and placebo groups, respectively. Death occurred in 12 (0.5%) and 12 (0.8%) patients in the abatacept and placebo groups, respectively, and was most commonly caused by cardiac disorders. Malignancies were observed in 31 patients (1.2%) treated with abatacept (IR: 1.32 [95% CI: 0.90, 1.87]) versus 14 (0.9%; IR: 1.12 [0.61, 1.88]) who received placebo. Solid organ tumor was the most frequent malignancy reported in both groups (abatacept: 1.0%; IR: 1.11 [95% CI: 0.72, 1.62]; placebo: 0.8%; 0.96 [0.50, 1.67]).
conclusionIn this integrated analysis, the IRs of safety events in the abatacept and placebo groups were similar with no new safety concerns identified.
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.