ArticleInfectious diseases & clinical microbiology2025
Monitoring of Patients Receiving Immunosuppressive and Biological Agent Treatments for Infectious Complications.
Article in Infectious diseases & clinical microbiology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the occurrence of infectious complications in rheumatology patients receiving various biological agent therapies. Materials and Methods: Patients who received biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were prospectively followed for two years. Results: A total of 235 patients were included in the study. Among the patients, 158 (67.3%) received anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy and 77 (32.7%) received non-anti-TNF biological agents. A positive tuberculin skin test was observed in 31.5% of patients, and interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) was positive in 10.6%. Latent tuberculosis reactivation occurred in 2 patients (0.8%) undergoing anti-TNF therapy. Of the 50 patients monitored for hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr), all were anti-HBc IgG-positive, and 5 (10%) were HBsAg-positive. Among them, 29 (58%) were followed preemptively, and 21 (42%) received prophylactic antiviral therapy. HBVr developed in 3 of 10 patients (30%) in the high-risk group, compared to 1 of 35 patients (2.8%) in the low-risk group. Bacterial infections -occurred in 29.8% of patients, with serious infections in 4.7% (n=11) and non-serious infections in 25.1% (n=59). Herpes zoster was reported in four patients, corresponding to an incidence rate (IR) of 0.88 per 100 person-years. Vaccination coverage was 23.8% for influenza, 4.7% for 23-valent polysaccharide pneumococcus, 3% for 13-valent conjugated pneumococcus, and 42.6% for HBV. Conclusions: Biological agents, due to their mechanisms of action, target various key molecules in the immune response against infectious antigens. Therefore, comprehensive risk assessment for infections and review of vaccination status are essential prior to initiating biological therapy. Stratifying patients based on the infectious risk profile of the biological agent is crucial for safe and effective treatment.
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.