ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Thalidomide and Sulfasalazine in Moderate to Severe Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Real-World Study From Bangladesh.
Article in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe present study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of thalidomide compared to sulfasalazine (SSZ) in moderate to severe cases of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in Bangladesh.
methodsThis experimental study was conducted from January 2017 to December 2018 in the Department of Rheumatology, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University (BSMMU), Dhaka, Bangladesh. The experimental study included 93 adult patients with moderate to severe AS (47 received thalidomide, and 46 received SSZ). Change in disease status was considered an efficacy endpoint, while the prevalence of adverse events was considered a safety endpoint.
resultsThalidomide showed better efficacy compared to SSZ in terms of disease activity index (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index) (2.84 vs. 4.49, p < 0.001). Secondary endpoints such as functional index (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index) (2.32 vs. 3.34, p = 0.021), patients' global assessment (2.92 vs. 4.11, p < 0.001), physician global assessment (2.67 vs. 3.60, p < 0.001), spinal pain score (2.52 vs. 3.31, p = 0.025), swollen joint count (0.05 vs. 0.40, p < 0.001), morning stiffness (2.08 vs. 3.27, p < 0.001), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (28.17 mm vs. 34.25 mm, p = 0.023), and C-reactive protein (9.57 mg/l vs. 21.34 mg/l, p = 0.027) were also better in the thalidomide group. Moreover, a significantly higher number of patients achieved 40% improvement in the thalidomide group compared to the SSZ group (90% vs. 10%, p < 0.001). Pedal edema was the most common adverse event (16, 46%) in the thalidomide group, followed by somnolence (13, 37%), drowsiness (12, 34%), dry mouth (11, 31%), and skin rash (11, 31%). On the other hand, anorexia (17, 48%), headache (15, 43%), and gastric irritation (10, 28%) were common adverse events in the SSZ group.
conclusionDespite a few mild side effects, thalidomide is effective and safe in comparison with SSZ for treating patients with moderate to severe AS for short-term assessment.
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.