ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2025
Eye-openers for advanced management of elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis.
Article 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Treat-to-target strategies are feasible in elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis given its reassuring risk-benefit profile.RMD open · 2026Trial
- Pathogenic Drivers of Difficult-to-Treat Rheumatoid Arthritis: Synovium and Beyond.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Disparities in clinical characteristics and health-related quality of life among young, young-onset elderly and elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis patients: A large-scale national survey.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Insights Into Late-Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis (LORA): Characteristics (Clinical and Imaging), Comorbidities, and Therapeutic Targets.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026Review
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
objectivesTo investigate whether clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) differ over 2 years based on the age of onset of RA.
methodsAll RA patients from the tREACH trial, a multicentre, stratified, single-blinded trial with a treat-to-target management approach and a fixed medication protocol were included. The age of disease onset was categorized into young-onset RA (YORA) (<45 years, n = 119), middle-aged onset RA (MORA) (45-65 years, n = 208) and elderly-onset RA (EORA) (>65 years, n = 98) at the time of diagnosis. Mixed models were used to compare clinical outcomes and PROs over time. The following PROs were included: pain (Numeric Rating Scale), fatigue (visual analogue scale), functional ability (HAQ-Disability Index, HAQ-DI), quality of life (European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions 3-Levels, EQ-5D-3L), and possible depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression, HADS-D) or anxiety disorder (HADS-Anxiety, HADS-A).
resultsAt diagnosis, EORA patients had more swollen joints, erosions and comorbidities than younger patients. However, disease activity remained similar across age groups at diagnosis and over time. After 2 years of follow-up, bDMARD usage was 30%, 30% and 15% in YORA, MORA and EORA patients, respectively. EORA patients also experienced less pain and fatigue over time compared with YORA patients [1 (95% CI 0.5-1.6) and 17.3 mm (11.3-23.4) lower] and MORA patients [0.6 (0.1-1) and 5.8 mm (0.7-10.9) lower]. No other clinically relevant PRO differences were observed.
conclusionDespite unfavourable prognostic factors at diagnosis, EORA patients have similar outcomes compared with their younger counterparts if a treat-to-target management approach is applied. Notably, fewer EORA patients required bDMARDs to reach the same treatment target.
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.