ArticleRMD open2025
Comparative analysis of global practices in the management of colchicine-resistant familial Mediterranean fever: a CliPS network analysis.
Article in RMD open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From diagnosis to treatment response: predicting FMF50 response using PREDICT-crFMF and TURPAID scores in children with Familial Mediterranean Fever: a retrospective cohort study.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Colchicine resistance prediction criteria from the TURPAID cohort do not apply to the JIR cohort: a multicentre descriptive analysis.RMD open · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough colchicine is the mainstay of familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) treatment, 5-10% of patients are considered to have colchicine resistance (CR). However, there is no globally agreed CR definition or indications for biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).
methodsA survey on 'Biologics in Monogenic Autoinflammatory Diseases', part of the 'Clinical Practice Strategies' (CLiPS) initiative, was conducted by a JIR cohort-initiated eCOST network among expert participants worldwide. Our primary aim was to provide a flowchart reflecting the different CR definitions and present data regarding bDMARD indications. The secondary aim was to determine how specific biases influence clinical approaches. We analysed the CliPS according to the experience levels of physicians, country-specific FMF prevalence, countries' gross domestic product, bDMARD availability and reimbursement policies of the countries.
resultsA total of 223 responses from 46 countries were included in the study. Almost half of the respondents (73/160, 45.6%) indicated that three to four attacks within the preceding 6 months were necessary for their CR definition. The most frequently used acute-phase reactant was C-reactive protein (157/164, 95.7%). Almost three-fourths of the respondents (74%, n=165) considered that supplementary factors, including complications of FMF, attack severity, elevated activity scores, patient-reported outcome and quality of life scales, influenced their CR definition.
conclusionWe present a novel flowchart describing physicians' general attitudes and unique findings regarding management strategies for colchicine-resistant FMF and shifting trends influenced by epidemiological and socioeconomic factors.
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.