ArticleClinical rheumatology2025
Comparison of the clinical efficacy and pharmacoeconomics of tofacitinib and adalimumab in Chinese patients with rheumatoid arthritis: An analysis based on propensity score matching.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and pharmacoeconomics of tofacitinib versus adalimumab in treating patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
methodsPropensity score matching was used to obtain matched cohorts of 116 RA patients treated with tofacitinib or adalimumab. Clinical and laboratory indicators were compared before and after treatment between the two groups. A Markov model was used to assess cost-effectiveness, incorporating direct and indirect costs. Sensitivity analyses validated model stability, with a 6-month cycle simulating lifelong disease progression (27 years).
resultsBoth the tofacitinib-treated group and the adalimumab-treated group showed significant improvements in terms of swollen and tender joint counts, duration of morning stiffness, VAS and HAQ scores, and ESR, CRP, and DAS28 levels (P < 0.05). Adalimumab treatment resulted in reductions in rheumatoid factor levels (P < 0.05). ACR20 (χ
conclusionTofacitinib combined with methotrexate demonstrated comparable clinical efficacy and safety to adalimumab combined with methotrexate, with better cost-effectiveness, supporting its use as a favorable treatment strategy. Key Points • Our research indicates that tofacitinib exhibits a more favorable pharmacoeconomic profile for treating rheumatoid arthritis, characterized by reduced treatment costs and increased quality-adjusted life years. • Tofacitinib consistently demonstrated its cost-effectiveness superiority over adalimumab across various sensitivity analyses, exhibiting a 99.38% likelihood of being more cost-effective.
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.