Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33409449›Full record

ArticleRheumatology advances in practice2020

Persistence of biologic treatments in psoriatic arthritis: a population-based study in Sweden.

Kirk Geale, Ingrid Lindberg, Emma C Paulsson, E Christina M Wennerström, Anna Tjärnlund, Wim Noel, Dana Enkusson, Elke Theander

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Rheumatology advances in practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Kirk GealeQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ingrid LindbergQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-6549-6065
Emma C PaulssonQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
E Christina M WennerströmJanssen-Cilag AB, Solna, Sweden.
Anna TjärnlundJanssen-Cilag AB, Solna, Sweden.
Wim NoelJanssen Pharmaceutica NV, Beerse, Belgium.
Dana EnkussonJanssen-Cilag AB, Solna, Sweden.
Elke TheanderJanssen-Cilag AB, Solna, Sweden.
Quantify Research (Sweden) · SEJanssen (Belgium) · BEStatens Serum Institut · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTNF inhibitors (TNFis) and IL inhibitors are effective treatments for PsA. Treatment non-persistence (drug survival, discontinuation) is a measure of effectiveness, tolerability and patient satisfaction or preferences in real-world clinical practice. Persistence on these treatments is not well understood in European PsA populations. The aim of this study was to compare time to non-persistence for either ustekinumab (IL-12/23 inhibitor) or secukinumab (IL-17 inhibitor) to a reference group of adalimumab (TNFi) treatment exposures in PsA patients and identify risk factors for non-persistence.

methodsA total of 4649 exposures of adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab in 3918 PsA patients were identified in Swedish longitudinal population-based registry data. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to measure treatment-specific real-world risk of non-persistence and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were estimated to identify risk factors associated with non-persistence.

resultsUstekinumab was associated with a lower risk of non-persistence relative to adalimumab in biologic-naïve [hazard ratio (HR) 0.48 (95% CI 0.33, 0.69)] and biologic-experienced patients [HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.56, 0.76)], while secukinumab was associated with a lower risk in biologic-naïve patients [HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.49, 0.86)] but a higher risk of non-persistence in biologic-experienced patients [HR 1.20 (95% CI 1.03, 1.40)]. Biologic non-persistence was also associated with female sex, axial involvement, recent disease onset, biologic treatment experience and no psoriasis.

conclusionUstekinumab exhibits a favourable treatment persistency profile relative to adalimumab overall and across lines of treatment. The performance of secukinumab is dependent on biologic experience. Persistence and risk factors for non-persistence should be accounted for when determining an optimal treatment plan for patients.

Indexed as

anti-rheumatic agentsautoimmune diseasesbiologic therapypsoriatic arthritis

Identifiers

PMID33409449
PMCPMC7772250
OpenAlexW3116465106

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.