Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32539813›Full record

ArticleArthritis research & therapy2020

Drug retention of 7 biologics and tofacitinib in biologics-naïve and biologics-switched patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the ANSWER cohort study.

Kosuke Ebina, Toru Hirano, Yuichi Maeda, Wataru Yamamoto, Motomu Hashimoto, Koichi Murata, Tohru Takeuchi, Hideyuki Shiba, Yonsu Son, Hideki Amuro and 7 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

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 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Kosuke EbinaDepartment of Musculoskeletal Regenerative Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan. k-ebina@umin.ac.jp.ORCID 0000-0002-2426-1024
Toru HiranoDepartment of Respiratory Medicine and Clinical Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Yuichi MaedaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine and Clinical Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Wataru YamamotoDepartment of Health Information Management, Kurashiki Sweet Hospital, Okayama, Japan.
Motomu HashimotoDepartment of Advanced Medicine for Rheumatic Diseases, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Koichi MurataDepartment of Advanced Medicine for Rheumatic Diseases, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Tohru TakeuchiDepartment of Internal Medicine (IV), Osaka Medical College, Osaka, Japan.
Hideyuki ShibaDepartment of Internal Medicine (IV), Osaka Medical College, Osaka, Japan.
Yonsu SonFirst Department of Internal Medicine, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan.
Hideki AmuroFirst Department of Internal Medicine, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan.
Akira OnishiDepartment of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Hyogo, Japan.
Kengo AkashiDepartment of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Hyogo, Japan.
Ryota HaraThe Center for Rheumatic Diseases, Nara Medical University, Nara, Japan.
Masaki KatayamaDepartment of Rheumatology, Osaka Red Cross Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Keiichi YamamotoDepartment of Medical Informatics, Wakayama Medical University Hospital, Wakayama, Japan.
Atsushi KumanogohDepartment of Respiratory Medicine and Clinical Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Makoto HiraoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka University, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis multi-center, retrospective study aimed to clarify retention rates and reasons for discontinuation of 7 biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and tofacitinib (TOF), one of the janus kinase inhibitors, in bDMARDs-naïve and bDMARDs-switched patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

methodsThis study assessed 3897 patients and 4415 treatment courses with bDMARDs and TOF from 2001 to 2019 (2737 bDMARDs-naïve courses and 1678 bDMARDs-switched courses [59.5% of switched courses were their second agent], female 82.3%, baseline age 57.4 years, disease duration 8.5 years; rheumatoid factor positivity 78.4%; Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using erythrocyte sedimentation rate 4.3; concomitant prednisolone [PSL] dose 6.1 mg/day [usage 42.4%], and methotrexate [MTX] dose 8.5 mg/week [usage 60.9%]). Treatment courses included abatacept (ABT; n = 663), adalimumab (ADA; n = 536), certolizumab pegol (CZP; n = 226), etanercept (ETN; n = 856), golimumab (GLM; n = 458), infliximab (IFX; n = 724), tocilizumab (TCZ; n = 851), and TOF (n = 101/only bDMARDs-switched cases). Drug discontinuation reasons (categorized into lack of effectiveness, toxic adverse events, non-toxic reasons, or remission) and rates were estimated at 36 months using Gray's test and statistically evaluated after adjusted by potential clinical confounders (age, sex, disease duration, concomitant PSL and MTX usage, starting date, and number of switched bDMARDs) using the Fine-Gray model.

resultsCumulative incidence of drug discontinuation for each reason was as follows: lack of effectiveness in the bDMARDs-naïve group (from 13.7% [ABT] to 26.9% [CZP]; P < 0.001 between agents) and the bDMARDs-switched group (from 18.9% [TCZ] to 46.1% [CZP]; P < 0.001 between agents); toxic adverse events in the bDMARDs-naïve group (from 4.6% [ABT] to 11.2% [ETN]; P < 0.001 between agents) and the bDMARDs-switched group (from 5.0% [ETN] to 15.7% [TOF]; P = 0.004 between agents); and remission in the bDMARDs-naïve group (from 2.9% [ETN] to 10.0% [IFX]; P < 0.001 between agents) and the bDMARDs-switched group (from 1.1% [CZP] to 3.3% [GLM]; P = 0.9 between agents).

conclusionsRemarkable differences were observed in drug retention of 7 bDMARDs and TOF between bDMARDs-naïve and bDMARDs-switched cases.

Indexed as

Antirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidBiological ProductsPharmaceutical PreparationsCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPiperidinesPyrimidinesRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAntirheumatic AgentsBiological ProductsPharmaceutical PreparationsPiperidinesPyrimidinestofacitinibANSWER cohortBiological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugsDrug retentionRheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

PMID32539813
PMCPMC7296929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.