ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Effectiveness and retention of certolizumab pegol and JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: a multicenter retrospective study stratified by rheumatoid factor status.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and high levels of Rheumatoid Factor (RF) often present with a higher inflammatory burden and may show a reduced response to JAK inhibitors (JAKi). However, previous studies have demonstrated that certolizumab pegol (CZP) provides comparable efficacy in patients regardless of RF level. Objectives: To compare the effectiveness and treatment retention of CZP versus JAKi in patients with RA according to baseline RF levels, assessing (a) changes in disease activity at 6 and 12 months, and (b) treatment retention over a 3-year follow-up period. Methods: This multicentre retrospective cohort included RA patients initiating CZP or JAKi (baricitinib, filgotinib, tofacitinib, upadacitinib) between 2010 and 2024. Patients were stratified by baseline RF levels (RF < 189 IU/mL and RF ≥ 189 IU/mL). Disease activity was assessed using DAS28-ESR at baseline, 6, and 12 months. Drug retention was analysed using Cox regression models, with a 3-year follow-up. A sensitivity analysis using IPTW was performed to account for baseline differences, while MICE and MNAR sensitivity analysis addressed missing data and informative missingness. Results: The study included 370 RA patients (409 treatment episodes: 234 CZP, 175 JAKi). Among patients with RF ≥ 189 IU/mL, CZP was associated with a greater reduction in DAS28-ESR than JAKi at both 6 and 12 months, with statistically significant differences at 12 months. In contrast, among patients with RF < 189 IU/mL, a greater reduction in DAS28-ESR at 6 months was observed in the JAK inhibitor group. CZP also demonstrated substantially higher drug retention at 3 years. In IPTW-weighted analyses, CZP was associated with a greater improvement in disease activity at 12 months in patients with RF ≥189 IU/mL, while treatment retention was numerically higher with CZP than with JAKi in this subgroup. However, the 12-month difference in clinical efficacy did not remain statistically significant under the MNAR sensitivity analysis. Conclusion: This study suggests that CZP may be associated with greater improvement in disease activity at 12 months in patients with RA and high RF levels, although this finding did not remain statistically significant under the MNAR sensitivity analysis and should therefore be interpreted with caution. A numerical difference in treatment retention favouring CZP was also observed. These findings highlight the potential importance of considering RF levels when selecting treatment and warrant further investigation in prospective studies.
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.