ArticlePediatric rheumatology online journal2026
Evaluation of adalimumab tapering regimens in children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis in remission: a simulation study.
Article in Pediatric rheumatology online journal, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdalimumab (ADM) in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is usually dosed using fixed weight-based bands (label dosing: 20 mg for < 30 kg, 40 mg for ≥ 30 kg) every other week (EOW). This has been shown to result in higher exposure after remission than targeted in adult patients with rheumatic diseases (trough concentrations of 2–8 mg/L) suggesting possibility of treatment adjustments and tapering, particularly in children weighing 30 to 50 kg. A pharmacometric simulation study was performed to evaluate different ADM dosing regimens supported by therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to provide insights for JIA management in remission.
methodsThis simulation study used a previously established pharmacokinetic ADM model. Simulation scenarios included dose reduction to 30 mg in children 30 to 50 kg and interval extension from 14 to 21 or 28 days. To further personalize ADM dosing and avoid exposure above predefined target range, TDM-guided tapering within mentioned simulation scenarios was investigated, i.e., adjusting dosing interval in children and adolescents whose ADM trough concentrations were above the upper limit of the predefined ADM target range of 9 mg/L. Proportions of virtual patients within the extrapolated target exposure range from adults including a safety-margin, i.e., 4–9 mg/L, were assessed and compared to label dosing, stratified by body weight.
resultsIn children and adolescents with JIA weighing 30 to 50 kg both, dose interval extension to 21 days and dose reduction to 30 mg EOW increased proportion of patients within predefined target range from 17 - 29% (label dose regimen) to 34–43% or 28–43%, respectively. TDM-guided tapering for patients with trough concentrations > 9 mg/L further increased proportion with target exposure to 56–63% while keeping the proportion of patients with trough concentrations < 2 mg/L similar to label dosing (≤ 2%).
conclusionThis simulation study suggests that ADM tapering, in children with JIA who reached remission, may be applicable. Appropriate ADM dose reduction or dose interval extension, especially when supported by TDM, could help to reduce treatment-related and socioeconomic burden, while minimize risk of underexposure. Provided simulation framework can be validated and further fine-tuned once paediatric exposure-response data and target ranges have been established.
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.