ArticleArthritis research & therapy2020
Treatment modalities and drug survival in a systemic sclerosis real-life patient cohort.
Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterisation of Systemic Sclerosis in a Jordanian Cohort: Clinical Features, Diagnostic Patterns, and Health-Related Quality of Life.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2026Article
- Clinical characteristics and treatment patterns of systemic sclerosis patients in China: a single-center retrospective study.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Observational
- Nintedanib in systemic sclerosis treatment: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2024Article
- Tocilizumab in systemic sclerosis treatment: a case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Aberrant expression of miR-138 as a novel diagnostic biomarker in systemic sclerosis.Biomarker insights · 2022Article
- Systemic mesalazine treatment prevents spontaneous skin fibrosis in PLK2-deficient mice.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2021Article
- Epidemiology of systemic sclerosis: a multi-database population-based study in Tuscany (Italy).Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 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
19 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEuropean data indicate that systemic sclerosis (SSc)-related death rates are increasing, thus raising concerns about SSc's optimal management. Herein, we describe current treatment modalities and drug survival in a real-life SSc cohort.
methodsDetails on immunosuppressive/antiproliferative (methotrexate, mycophenolate, cyclophosphamide, azathioprine, rituximab, tocilizumab) and vasoactive agent [(endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs), sildenafil, iloprost, and calcium channel blockers (CCB)] administration during the disease course (11.8 ± 8.4 years, mean + SD) of 497 consecutive patients examined between 2016 and 2018 were retrospectively recorded. Drug survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis.
resultsMethotrexate was the most frequently administered immunosuppressive/antiproliferative agent (53% of patients), followed by cyclophosphamide (26%), mycophenolate (12%), and azathioprine (11%). Regarding vasoactive agents, CCB had been ever administered in 68%, ERAs in 38%, iloprost in 7%, and sildenafil in 7% of patients; 23% of patients with pulmonary fibrosis had never received immunosuppressive/antiproliferative agents, 33% of those with digital ulcers had never received ERAs, iloprost, or sildenafil, whereas 19% of all patients had never received either immunosuppressive/antiproliferative or other than CCB vasoactive agents. Survival rates of methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, and mycophenolate differed significantly, being 84/75%, 59/43%, and 74/63% at 12/24 months, respectively, with inefficacy being the most frequent discontinuation cause. Conversely, CCB, ERAs, and sildenafil had high and comparable retention rates of 97/91%, 88/86%, and 80/80%, respectively.
conclusionsExisting therapeutic limitations indicate that more evidence-based treatment is warranted for successful management of SSc. Vasculopathy seems to be managed more rigorously, but the low retention rates of immunosuppressive/antiproliferative drugs suggest that effective and targeted disease-modifying agents are warranted.
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.