Observational studyThe Lancet. Rheumatology2025
Advanced therapies in US veterans with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease: a retrospective, active-comparator, new-user, cohort study.
Observational study in The Lancet. Rheumatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Therapeutic approaches for difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review of current evidence.RMD open · 2026Pooled it
- The evolving comorbidity landscape of rheumatoid arthritis.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2026Review
- Development and Internal Validation of an Explainable Machine Learning Model for Predicting Buttock Claudication After EVAR: A Dual-Center Cohort Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Interstitial Lung Disease in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Incidence and Outcomes in Western Australia.International journal of rheumatic diseases · 2026Article
- Radiological diversity in rheumatoid arthritis associated with usual interstitial pneumonia (RA-UIP) and its therapeutic implications: towards a generalizable framework of interstitial lung disease treatment.Respiratory research · 2026Review
- Pathogenic Drivers of Difficult-to-Treat Rheumatoid Arthritis: Synovium and Beyond.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- The immune dysregulation of fibrosis: insights into immune-fibrotic crosstalk and potential therapeutic targets.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- What to do when the first TNF inhibitor fails in rheumatoid arthritis: stratified expert recommendations from a scoping review and Delphi consensus.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2026Article
- Precision medicine in rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease: current evidence and future directions.Current opinion in pulmonary medicine · 2025Review
- Impact of csDMARDs vs. b/tsDMARDs on the Prognosis of Rheumatoid Arthritis-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
Abstract
backgroundUncertainty exists regarding patient outcomes when using TNF inhibitors versus other biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (ILD). We compared survival and respiratory hospitalisation outcomes following initiation of TNF-inhibitor or non-TNF inhibitor biological or targeted synthetic DMARDs for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis-associated ILD.
methodsWe did a retrospective, active-comparator, new-user, observational cohort study with propensity score matching following the target trial emulation framework using US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) electronic and administrative health records. VA health-care enrollees with rheumatoid arthritis-associated ILD and no previous receipt of ILD-directed therapies (eg, antifibrotics) who initiated a TNF inhibitor or non-TNF inhibitor between Jan 1, 2006, and Dec 31, 2018, were included. Propensity score matching was performed using demographics, health-care use, health behaviours, comorbidity burden, rheumatoid arthritis-related severity factors, and ILD-related severity factors, including baseline forced vital capacity. Study outcomes were respiratory hospitalisation, all-cause mortality, and respiratory-related death over follow-up of up to 3 years, from VA, Medicare, and National Death Index data. People with lived experience of rheumatoid arthritis-associated ILD were not involved in the design or conduct of this study.
findingsOf 1047 patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated-ILD who initiated biological or targeted synthetic DMARDs, we matched 237 patients who had initiated TNF inhibitors and 237 who had initiated non-TNF inhibitors (mean age 68 years [SD 9]); 434 (92%) of 474 were male and 40 (8%) were female. Death and respiratory hospitalisation did not significantly differ between groups (adjusted hazard ratio 1·21 [95% CI 0·92-1·58]). Respiratory hospitalisation (1·27 [0·91-1·76]), all-cause mortality (1·15 [0·83-1·60]), and respiratory mortality (1·38 [0·79-2·42]) did not differ between groups. Secondary, sensitivity, and subgroup analyses supported the primary findings.
interpretationIn US veterans with rheumatoid arthritis-associated ILD, no difference in outcomes were seen between those who started TNF inhibitors compared to those starting non-TNF biological or targeted synthetic DMARDs. These data do not support systematic avoidance of TNF inhibitors in all people with rheumatoid arthritis-associated ILD. Comparative efficacy trials in patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated ILD are needed given the potential for residual confounding and selection bias in observational studies.
fundingUS Department of Veterans Affairs.
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.