ReviewRheumatology (Oxford, England)2025
Rheumatoid factors revisited in the age of biologic therapy.
Review in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Why a positive rheumatoid factor test does not always mean rheumatoid arthritis.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2026Article
- A case report of falsely elevated high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I due to macro-troponin I.Practical laboratory medicine · 2026Article
- Comment on: Clinical outcomes in psoriatic arthritis patients with rheumatoid factor positivity: Reply.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes in psoriatic arthritis patients with rheumatoid factor positivity.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Ozoralizumab, a trivalent anti-TNFα NANOBODYFrontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Immunological profiling of rheumatoid factor-positive primary Sjögren's syndrome by single-cell RNA sequencing.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated protein IgA antibodies in the diagnosis, prognosis and monitoring of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2025Review
- Single-Center Cross-Sectional Analysis of Patients with RA, SpA, and PsA: Data from the Prescription Database.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Identification and validation of CKAP2 as a novel biomarker in the development and progression of rheumatoid arthritis.Frontiers in immunology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The discovery of RF has been instrumental in diagnosing and classifying RA. Various RF isotypes, including IgM-RF and IgA-RF, have been linked to disease severity and treatment responses. The role of RF in RA pathogenesis, primarily through the formation of immune complexes, also carries the potential to influence the response to different medications. Recent progress in biologic therapies has further elucidated the role of RF in RA management. Treatments such as rituximab, abatacept and tocilizumab have shown differential efficacy based on RF status, with RF-positive patients often exhibiting better responses. Recent research also suggests that TNF inhibitors (TNFi) lacking the IgG1-Fc fragment like certolizumab pegol (CZP) may offer advantages over TNFi with an IgG1-Fc fragment, in RF-positive patients by preventing immune complex formation. Since this early observation is predominantly derived from previous multicentre studies with heterogeneous populations and potentially varying RF measurement methods, prospective randomized studies directly addressing this issue are essential for a more thorough and reliable evaluation. This paper is a narrative review outlining the evolving understanding of RF in the context of biologic therapies, emphasizing the need for personalized treatment approaches based on serological profiles and underlying immune mechanisms.
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.