ReviewNature reviews. Rheumatology2022
Improving the design of RCTs in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis.
Review in Nature reviews. Rheumatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Concerns have been raised that randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) might be failing to identify patients that best show differences in clinical response rates between those receiving active drug and those receiving placebo therapies; in addition, some studies might even be showing spurious differences in responses to TNF and IL-17 inhibitor therapies. In particular, the most recent phase III RCTs in nr-axSpA have reported variable and generally lower response rates than observed in phase III trials of patients with ankylosing spondylitis and in trials conducted a decade ago in patients with early axSpA who were selected on the basis of axial inflammation evident on MRI scans. We argue that these observations at least partly reflect an RCT design that does not take full advantage of MRI to select patients who are responsive to therapy because the current MRI-based inclusion criteria cannot identify patients with axSpA with sufficient specificity. We propose that future studies should be designed using revised patient inclusion criteria based on expanded MRI evaluation and the application of data-driven definitions of a positive MRI for inflammatory and structural lesions typical of axSpA reported in an international multicentre analysis of MRI scans from the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) classification cohort.
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.