4.7 Article

Effect of tumour necrosis factor blockers on radiographic progression of psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

期刊

ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES
卷 73, 期 2, 页码 414-419

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-202641

关键词

-

资金

  1. Pfizer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) to examine the effect of tumour necrosis factor (TNF) blockers on radiographic progression, and to determine whether treatment combining TNF blocker with methotrexate (MTX) was superior to TNF-blocker monotherapy. Methods We systematically reviewed articles published up to December 2012 in Embase and Medline, and from the two last EUropean League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and American College or Rheumatology (ACR) meetings. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with no radiographic progression (nonprogressors) at treatment week 24 (defined by change in modified total Sharp score (mTSS) <= 0.5). The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to estimate ORs and 95% CIs of the effect of TNF blockers (with or without MTX) versus placebo (with or without MTX). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by chi(2) test. Results The search retrieved 207 articles; 5 (1110 patients) met the meta-analysis criteria. For patients receiving TNF blockers, 494/584 (84.5%) were considered non-progressors at treatment week 24 vs 362/526 (68.8%) receiving placebo (OR 2.68 (95% CI 1.99 to 3.60) p<0.001), without significant heterogeneity (I2=3%; p=0.39). Only three RCTs provided data on potential additional efficacy of MTX: two did not find significant difference, one suggested a benefit of combined therapy. Conclusions For patients with PsA, control of structural damage is better at week 24 with TNF blockers than placebo. Due to the limited data, we were unable to conclude on the potential additional effect of MTX on structural damages.

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

4.7
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