Observational studyRheumatology (Oxford, England)2026
Persistence and effectiveness of upadacitinib and TNFi for rheumatoid arthritis using pooled data from Canadian and Swiss registries.
Observational study in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe ROSA study evaluated real-world persistence and effectiveness of upadacitinib and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), using data from two Canadian registries, RHUMADATA and Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative (OBRI), and the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases (SCQM) registry.
methodsThis observational study analysed data from 990 patients with RA who initiated upadacitinib or TNFi between 1 January 2020 and 30 June 2023. Multiple imputation was used for baseline covariates with missing data and results were adjusted for propensity scores derived from pre-specified variables (age, disease duration, prior treatments, comorbidities, etc.). Persistence was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard regression models. Effectiveness was evaluated using observed (non-imputed) disease activity indices over 6 and 12 months.
resultsOverall, 174, 216 and 600 patients were included from the RHUMADATA, OBRI, SCQM registries, respectively. Patients using upadacitinib had a lower risk of discontinuing treatment than patients using TNFi [hazard-ratio (HR) (95% CI): 0.602 (0.469, 0.773)] and this was unaffected by previous exposure to advanced treatment. Concomitant use of any csDMARD HR (95% CI); [upadacitinib: 0.225 (0.107, 0.471); TNFi: 0.516 (0.303, 0.881)], and methotrexate [upadacitinib: 0.604 (0.390, 0.934); TNFi: 0.694 (0.522, 0.925)] were associated with improved persistence for both groups. A similar proportion of patients receiving upadacitinib or TNFi achieved Clinical Disease Activity Index low disease activity or remission at 6 months (70.8% vs 61.0%; P = 0.1541) and 12 months (70.5% vs 75.2%; P = 0.4494).
conclusionCanadian and Swiss patients with RA had longer persistence with upadacitinib than TNFi, independent of previous advanced treatments.
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.