ArticleClinical rheumatology2024
A hierarchical cluster analysis for clinical profiling of tofacitinib treatment response in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tofacitinib is the first oral JAK inhibitor approved for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To enhance our understanding of tofacitinib drug response, we used hierarchical clustering to analyse the profiles of patient who responded to the treatment in a real-world setting. Patients who commenced on tofacitinib treatment were selected from 12 major rheumatology centres in Malaysia. The aim was to assess their response to tofacitinib defined as achieving DAS28-CRP/ESR ≤ 3.2 and DAS28 improvement > 1.2 at 12 weeks. A hierarchical clustering analysis was performed using sociodemographic and clinical parameters at baseline. All 163 RA patients were divided into three clusters (Clusters 1, 2 and 3) based on specific clinical factors at baseline including bone erosion, antibody positivity, disease activity and anaemia status. Cluster 1 consisted of RA patients without bone erosion, antibody negative, low baseline disease activity measure and absence of anaemia. Cluster 2 comprised of patients without bone erosion, RF positivity, anti-CCP negativity, moderate to high baseline disease activity score and absence of anaemia. Cluster 3 patients had bone erosion, antibody positivity, high baseline disease activity and anaemia. The response rates to tofacitinib varied among the clusters: Cluster 1 had a 79% response rate, Cluster 2 had a 66% response rate, and Cluster 3 had a 36% response rate. The differences in response rates between the three clusters were found to be statistically significant. This cluster analysis study indicates that patients who are seronegative and have low disease activity, absence of bone erosion and no signs of anaemia may have a higher likelihood of benefiting from tofacitinib therapy. By identifying clinical profiles that respond to tofacitinib treatment, we can improve treatment stratification yielding significant benefits and better health outcomes for individuals with RA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38922551What 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.