4.5 Article

Joint Damage Progression in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Clinical Remission. Do Biologics Perform Better Than Synthetic Antirheumatic Drugs?

期刊

JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY
卷 41, 期 8, 页码 1576-1582

出版社

J RHEUMATOL PUBL CO
DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.130767

关键词

RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; DISEASE ACTIVITY; JOINT DAMAGE PROGRESSION; ANTIRHEUMATIC THERAPY; REMISSION; TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR-alpha INHIBITORS

资金

  1. Montreal University
  2. AMRQ (Association des Medecins Rhumatologues du Quebec)
  3. Geneva University
  4. Swiss National Science Foundation [3200B0-120639, 310030-135195]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. Randomized controlled studies have demonstrated protective advantages of biologic therapies over the synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in slowing joint damage progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This effect appears to be largely independent of the clinical disease control. We measured the rate of radiographic progression in patients with RA in clinical remission treated with synthetic versus biologic DMARD. Methods. This is an observational cohort study of patients with RA in clinical remission, nested within the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatoid Arthritis (SCQM-RA) Registry. The primary study outcome was the rate of radiographic progression (Ratingen erosion score), and a secondary outcome was functional disability [Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)] progression. We compared the rate of progression between synthetic and biologic DMARD using a multivariate regression model for longitudinal data, adjusting for potential confounders. Results. A total of 2055 patients in the SCQM-RA registry were in remission at least once from 1999 to 2012 and met the study inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics of patients in remission receiving synthetic and biologic DMARD were not significantly different in terms of prognostic factors for joint damage progression. During followup, erosion progression differed significantly between the 2 groups [1.4% (95% CI: 1.1-1.6) vs 0.9% (95% CI: 0.5-1.2) of progression over 3 years, respectively, p < 0.001], with less damage progression in patients treated with biologic DMARD than with synthetic DMARD. This difference remained significant after adjusting for confounding factors. The evolution of the HAQ-DI score was also statistically better in the biologic group (p < 0.001). Conclusion. This observational study confirms that the rate of structural damage progression in clinical remission is decreased taking biologics compared to synthetic DMARD. However, while the difference is statistically significant it is probably not relevant from a clinical perspective.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据