Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39516011›Full record

ArticleRMD open2024

Remission versus low disease activity as treatment targets in rheumatoid arthritis: how to strike the right balance between too strict and too lenient targets? A meta-epidemiological study of individual patient data.

Catia Duarte, Johannes W G Jacobs, Ricardo J O Ferreira, Paco M J Welsing, Laure Gossec, Pedro M Machado, Désirée van der Heijde, Jose Antonio Pereira da Silva

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in RMD open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
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

8 authors.

Catia DuarteRheumatology, ULS de Coimbra EPE, Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-9327-6935
Johannes W G JacobsRheumatology & Clinical Immunology, UMC, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Ricardo J O FerreiraNursing Research, Innovation and Development Centre of Lisbon (CIDNUR), Higher School of Nursing of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-2517-0247
Paco M J WelsingRheumatology & Clinical Immunology, UMC, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Laure GossecINSERM, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, INSERM, Sorbonne Universite, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-4528-310X
Pedro M MachadoDepartment of Neuromuscular Diseases, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8411-7972
Désirée van der HeijdeRheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5781-158X
Jose Antonio Pereira da SilvaRheumatology, ULS de Coimbra EPE, Coimbra, Portugal jdasilva@ci.uc.pt.ORCID 0000-0002-2782-6780

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the impact of using Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI)-LDA (low disease activity) versus different definitions of remission as a treatment target in established rheumatoid arthritis.

methodsA meta-epidemiological study of individual patient data from eight randomised controlled trials was performed. Four definitions of the target were considered at 6 months: (1) SDAI-LDA: SDAI≤11; (2) SDAI-Remission: SDAI≤3.3; (3) 4V-Remission: Tender and swollen 28-joint counts and C reactive protein (mg/dL) all ≤1 and patient global assessment (PGA)≤2 and (4) 3-variable (3V)-Remission: as 4V, excluding PGA. The mean radiographic change in the modified total Sharp-van der Heijde score (mTSS) and the Good Radiographic Outcome rates (defined as a change of ≤0.5 units mTSS) over 2 years were compared among target definitions. Radiographic progression and the distribution of the individual criteria of the Boolean definition in the only LDA subgroup (3.3<SDAI≤11) were analysed.

resultsIn total, 4374 patients (mean disease duration of 5.9 years (95% CI 4.6; 7.1)) were included. The pooled rate of SDAI-LDA at 6 months was 49%, with 13% in SDAI-remission. The 4V-Remission and 3V-Remission were achieved by 16% and 23%, respectively. Mean radiographic progression was 0.55 (0.14; 0.96) units for SDAI-LDA and 0.22 (-0.09; 0.54), 0.28 (-0.07; 0.62), 0.28 (-0.10; 0.65) for SDAI-Remission, 4V-Remission and 3V-Remission states, respectively. Patients with SDAI Pure-LDA presented significantly more radiographic progression than patients in SDAI-Remission (mean 0.72 vs 0.22 units, p<0.05). Over 53% of all patients achieving SDAI-LDA were not in 3V-Remission and had more mean radiographic progression over 2 years than those who met both targets (0.70 vs 0.25 units, p=0.014). Among patients with SDAI-LDA but not in SDAI-Remission, 40% scored PGA>2, reflecting relevant disease impact.

conclusionSDAI-LDA is associated with more structural damage over 2 years than any of the definitions of remission. It also allows substantial disease impact to go unchecked and uncontrolled. Physicians should strive for remission whenever possible and safe while also taking into account the different individual disease activity parameters included in the adopted definition.

Indexed as

Antirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidRemission InductionSeverity of Illness IndexDisease ProgressionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAntirheumatic AgentsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresRheumatoid Arthritis

Identifiers

PMID39516011
PMCPMC11552590

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.