Observational studyPediatric rheumatology online journal2024
Implementation study of the CARRA Uveitis Consensus Treatment Plans: feasibility for clinical practice and applicability for research.
Observational study in Pediatric rheumatology online journal, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic anterior uveitis (CAU) carries a significant risk for eye complications and vision loss. The Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) introduced consensus treatment plans (CTPs) to standardize treatment for CAU and facilitate future comparative effectiveness studies. Two CTPs were developed to address: 1) initiation of methotrexate (MTX) in patients with CAU naïve to steroid-sparing therapy, and 2) initiation of a TNF inhibitor (TNFi) in patients with severe uveitis or uveitis refractory to MTX. We evaluated implementation of the uveitis CTPs using existing CARRA Registry infrastructure and assessed feasibility of the CTPs for comparative effectiveness research.
methodsThis prospective observational cohort study was conducted at nine pilot sites between February 2020 and August 2022. Patients with JIA-associated CAU (JIA-U) were treated according to either the MTX or TNFi CTP. Uveitis activity and medication use were recorded at 0, 3, and 6 months. We assessed patient enrollment rates, CTP arm selection, uveitis control, and quality of data collection. We also evaluated CTP arm selection in a retrospective cohort of similar JIA-U patients enrolled in the CARRA Registry during the same study period.
resultsSeventeen patients were included in the pilot cohort. Eight were treated with the MTX CTP (4 oral MTX, 4 subcutaneous MTX), and 9 with the TNFi CTP (9 received standard-dose adalimumab, none selected high-dose adalimumab or infliximab). Uveitis was controlled in 13 of 17 patients by 6 months. Query of the CARRA-wide Registry identified 42 patients with JIA-U who were treated according to the MTX or TNFi CTPs. Among these, 26 were treated with MTX (8 oral, 18 subcutaneous) and 16 with TNFi (12 standard dose adalimumab, 2 high dose adalimumab, and 2 infliximab).
conclusionBoth the MTX and TNFi uveitis CTPs can practically be implemented in clinical settings and are currently being utilized across Registry sites. However, in patients starting TNFi therapy, all pilot study participants and most patients across the CARRA Registry were treated with a standard dose of adalimumab. This consensus on the treatment approach underscores its broad acceptance but also limits the applicability of the uveitis TNFi CTP for comparative effectiveness research.
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.