ArticleRheumatology and therapy2026
Long-term Comparative Adherence and Switch Rates in Patients Receiving Advanced Therapies for Rheumatoid Arthritis After Use of One TNF Inhibitor.
Article in Rheumatology and therapy, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) often fail to achieve treatment targets with first-line treatment because of poor efficacy or tolerability. However, comparative long-term adherence and switching data among patients initiating a second-line therapy after a first-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) remain limited.
methodsRetrospective data were from the Merative MarketScan
resultsOverall, 3782 and 1182 patients were included for the 1- and 3-year analyses, respectively. The proportion of patients with adherence ≥ 80% was highest with UPA at 1-year (49.5%) and 3-year follow-up (35.7%) versus other treatments. Compared with UPA through 3 years, odds of being adherent were significantly lower for TOF (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.45 [0.29-0.71]), ADA (0.50 [0.33-0.75]), ETA (0.37 [0.24-0.58]), ABA (0.43 [0.26-0.73]), and TOC (0.46 [0.22-0.99]; p < 0.05). Switch rates were lowest for UPA versus other treatments at 1 year (28.6%) and remained lowest through 3 years (47.6%), while rates for all other treatments increased to approximately 60%. Through 3 years, patients were also significantly (p < 0.05) more likely to switch treatment when receiving TOF (adjusted hazard ratios [95% confidence interval]: 1.40 [1.07-1.84]), ADA (1.44 [1.12-1.86]), ETA (1.57 [1.21-2.03]), ABA (1.56 [1.16-2.10]), and TOC (1.54 [1.03-2.32]) compared with UPA. Median 3-year time to switch was not reached for UPA and was 528-660 days for all other treatments.
conclusionAmong patients with RA who discontinued a first-line TNFi, second-line UPA was associated with significantly greater long-term adherence and lower switching rates than other advanced therapies.
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.