Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34213524›Full record

SynthesisRheumatology (Oxford, England)2021

The efficacy of systemic glucocorticosteroids for pain in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

Daniel F McWilliams, Divya Thankaraj, Julie Jones-Diette, Rheinallt Morgan, Onosi S Ifesemen, Nicholas G Shenker, David A Walsh

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
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

7 authors.

Daniel F McWilliamsDivision of ROD, Pain Centre Versus Arthritis, NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, University of Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0581-1895
Divya ThankarajDivision of ROD, Pain Centre Versus Arthritis, NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, University of Nottingham, UK.
Julie Jones-DietteDivision of ROD, Pain Centre Versus Arthritis, NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, University of Nottingham, UK.
Rheinallt MorganElective Orthopaedics Department, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
Onosi S IfesemenDivision of ROD, Pain Centre Versus Arthritis, NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, University of Nottingham, UK.
Nicholas G ShenkerDepartment of Rheumatology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9852-5811
David A WalshDivision of ROD, Pain Centre Versus Arthritis, NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, University of Nottingham, UK.

Funding

Department of HealthMedical Research Council MC_PC_19095
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesGlucocorticosteroids (GCs) are recommended to suppress inflammation in people with active RA. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantify the effects of systemic GCs on RA pain.

methodsA systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in RA comparing systemic GCs to inactive treatment. Three databases were and spontaneous pain and evoked pain outcomes were extracted. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and mean differences were meta-analysed. Heterogeneity (I2, tau statistics) and bias (funnel plot, Egger's test) were assessed. Subgroup analyses investigated sources of variation. This study was pre-registered (PROSPERO CRD42019111562).

resultsA total of 18 903 titles, 880 abstracts and 226 full texts were assessed. Thirty-three RCTs suitable for the meta-analysis included 3123 participants. Pain scores (spontaneous pain) decreased in participants treated with oral GCs; SMD = -0.65 (15 studies, 95% CI -0.82, -0.49, P <0.001) with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 56%, P =0.0002). Efficacy displayed time-related decreases after GC initiation. Mean difference visual analogue scale pain was -15 mm (95% CI -20, -9) greater improvement in GC than control at ≤3 months, -8 mm (95% CI -12, -3) at >3-6 months and -7 mm (95% CI -13, 0) at >6 months. Similar findings were obtained when evoked pain outcomes were examined. Data from five RCTs suggested improvement also in fatigue during GC treatment.

conclusionOral GCs are analgesic in RA. The benefit is greatest shortly after initiation and GCs might not achieve clinically important pain relief beyond 3 months. Treatments other than anti-inflammatory GCs should be considered to reduce the long-term burden of pain in RA.

Indexed as

Arthritis, RheumatoidFatigueGlucocorticoidsHumansPainGlucocorticoidsglucocorticoidsmeta-analysispainRAtender joint

Identifiers

PMID34213524
PMCPMC8742830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.