ReviewZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2023
[Assessment of interactions and dosage recommendations of synthetic DMARDs-Evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations based on a systematic literature search].
Review in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Rheumatological care of older people : Annual report 2026 from the National Database of the regional Collaborative Arthritis Centers].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2026Article
- [Management of osteologic and renal comorbidities in patients with rheumatic diseases].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2025Review
- Methotrexate - Safe Backbone for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis.Current rheumatology reviews · 2025Review
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conventional synthetic (cs) and targeted synthetic (ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) have potential interactions with a multitude of drugs. Furthermore, they sometimes have a lower therapeutic index, particularly in cases of limited organ functions. The aim of this work was to establish evidence-based recommendations on the therapeutic use of DMARDs in the context of drug interactions and dosage recommendations. A systematic literature search was carried out on the issue of drug interactions and dosages in cases of patients with limited kidney function and higher age and suffering from rheumatoid arthritis. A total of 2756 scientific publications were screened and 154 selected of which 68 were scrutinized in detail. Furthermore, the respective specialist subject information was also analyzed. A multitude of possible interactions of synthetic DMARDs with different drugs were detected, which were then assessed with respect to the clinical significance and consequences. A consensus process led to making recommendations with which the interactions were classified: A: dangerous combination, B: avoid combination (if possible, pausing DMARD treatment), C: possible combination requiring increased monitoring and potential adjustments in dosage and D: pharmacological interaction without relevance in DMARD standard doses. Apart from that dosage recommendations were established for each csDMARD and tsDMARD depending on kidney function and age. There are 3 primary recommendations and 11 core recommendations on interactions and dosages of csDMARDs and tsDMARDs meant as a practical help for therapeutic decision making and to improve safety in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.
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.