ArticleTherapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease2021
Prescription strategy of antimalarials in cutaneous and systemic lupus erythematosus: an international survey.
Article in Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety, Tolerability, Efficacy, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of Afimetoran, a Toll-Like Receptor 7 and 8 Inhibitor, in Patients With Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus: A Phase 1b Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.ACR open rheumatology · 2025Article
- Lupus and other autoimmune diseases: Epidemiology in the population of African ancestry and diagnostic and management challenges in Africa.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2024Review
- Improving patient pathways for systemic lupus erythematosus: a multistakeholder pathway optimisation study.Lupus science & medicine · 2022Article
- Hydroxychloroquine in systemic lupus erythematosus: overview of current knowledge.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2022Review
- An update on the management of refractory cutaneous lupus erythematosus.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAntimalarial agents (AMs), mainly hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine, are the cornerstone of treatment of cutaneous and systemic lupus erythematosus. However, many aspects of AM prescription remain empirical. The aim of this study was to assess the modalities of AM prescription among physicians treating patients with lupus and to verify the assumption that AM use is heterogeneous and frequently at variance with international guidelines.
methodsWe performed an international cross-sectional study among physicians involved in lupus care, using a web-based survey (from September 2019 to July 2020) addressing the main controversial aspects of AM prescription.
resultsA total of 298 physicians [median age: 42 (interquartile range: 17) years, mainly internists and rheumatologists] from 35 countries participated to the study. A total of 93% used HCQ as the first-line AM, 69.5% used fixed doses of AMs (mainly 400 mg/day for HCQ) and only 37.9% adjusted the dose in case of renal failure. The main reasons for measuring HCQ blood levels were suspected non-adherence (55.7%) and failure of AM treatment (34.1%). In case of AM failure, 58.0% added an immunosuppressive agent. In case of remission, 49.7% maintained the same dose of AM, whereas 48.3% reduced the dose. One-third of respondents reported not following the American screening guidelines on AM retinal toxicity and 40.9% started retinal screening from the first year of treatment.
conclusionThis study highlights the strong heterogeneity of AM prescription in lupus, as well as several key unmet needs regarding AMs. This may be improved by developing more comprehensive recommendations and favoring dissemination among physicians.
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.