Trial reportRMD open2026
Induction of Cure in Early Arthritis (I CEA): results of a randomised clinical trial to compare three treatment strategies in recent onset undifferentiated arthritis.
Trial report in RMD open, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate whether in undifferentiated arthritis (UA) it is beneficial to start early treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) compared with symptomatic therapy.
methodsThe Induction of Cure in Early Arthritis study is a 3-month multicentre single-blinded randomised controlled trial followed by a 9-month observational period. Patients with early DMARD-naïve UA (arthritis ≥2 joints, not fulfilling American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) 2010 Rheumatoid Arthritis criteria) received a glucocorticoid injection (40 mg intra-articular or intramuscular) and were randomised (1:1:1) to a 3-month intervention with (1) non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in standard daily dose or (2) methotrexate (MTX) 15 mg/week increased to 25 mg/week or (3) baricitinib 4 mg/day. Primary endpoint was Disease Activity Score (DAS) (44/53 joints) improvement at 3 months. Differences between treatment arms were assessed with analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline DAS.
resultsPatients were randomised to NSAID (n=29), MTX (n=28) or baricitinib (n=28). After 3 months, baricitinib gave a significant improvement in DAS compared with NSAIDs: adjusted mean change in DAS: -0.52 (95% CI -0.93 to -0.11; p=0.01). MTX gave a numerically similar improvement: -0.39 (95% CI -0.84 to 0.06, p=0.09). Although non-significant, at 12 months DAS was lowest in the MTX treatment arm 1.3 (SD 0.7), NSAID 1.6 (SD 0.9), baricitinib 1.7 (SD 0.9), p=0.38. Incidence rates of severe adverse events remained low during the study across all treatment arms.
conclusionsIn patients with UA, early DMARD treatment led to greater improvement in disease activity over 3 months compared with NSAIDs, with the improvement for baricitinib reaching statistical significance. Over 12 months, disease activity was not significantly different across treatment arms, with overall favourable outcomes.
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.