首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Inflammation Research >Methotrexate (MTX) Plus Hydroxychloroquine versus MTX Plus Leflunomide in Patients with MTX-Resistant Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: A 2-Year Cohort Study in Real World
【24h】

Methotrexate (MTX) Plus Hydroxychloroquine versus MTX Plus Leflunomide in Patients with MTX-Resistant Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: A 2-Year Cohort Study in Real World

机译:甲氨蝶呤(MTX)加羟氯喹对MTX抗性活性类风湿性关节炎患者的羟基氯喹(MTX Plus Leflunomide):一个2年的队列在现实世界中的研究

获取原文
       

摘要

Purpose:To compare the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of methotrexate (MTX) plus hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) vs MTX plus leflunomide (LEF) in established rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with inadequate response to MTX monotherapy in a real-world Chinese cohort.Patients and Methods:A prospective RA cohort (n=549) was screened with eligible patients who had inadequate response (disease activity score in 28 joints using erythrocyte sedimentation rate, DAS28-ESR3.2) to initial MTX monotherapy and subsequently received either MTX HCQ or MTX LEF. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to adjust the possible baseline confounders between two groups. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving first remission (DAS28-ESR2.6) during follow-up by log rank test. Secondary outcomes were changes of DAS28, glucocorticoids (GCs) exposure, safety, cost-effectiveness, sustained remission, and low disease activity (LDA) rate after 24-month follow-up.Results:Overall, 222 eligible patients were subjected to the aforementioned two treatment protocols (MTX HCQ, n=102; MTX LEF, n=120). After PSM adjustment, 97 patients in each group were analyzed. A higher remission rate was observed in the MTX HCQ group than in the MTX LEF group (70.1% vs 56.7%, P=0.048). The median time to remission was 11 and 16 months in the two groups, respectively. At the endpoint, more patients achieved remission (46.8% vs 32.5%, P=0.063) and maintained sustained LDA in the HCQ group (53.2% vs 38.6%, P=0.062) and also more patients withdrew GCs in this group (32% vs 16.7%, P=0.053) than those in the LEF group. Safety profiles were non-alarming, with no significant difference between the two groups. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio yielded by MTX HCQ over MTX LEF was $1,111.8 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), within the cost-effective threshold set as the per capita gross domestic product (GDP) of China.Conclusion:The MTX HCQ combination was seemingly superior to MTX LEF in a real-world cohort of Chinese RA patients with inadequate response to methotrexate monotherapy in respect of the efficacy and cost-effectiveness.? 2020 Zhang et al.
机译:目的:比较甲氨蝶呤(MTX)加羟基氯喹(HCQ)与MTX加上Leflunomide(LEF)的疗效,安全性和成本效果在成熟的类风湿性关节炎(RA)中,对现实世界队列的MTX单疗法的反应不足.Patives和方法:筛选前瞻性RA队列(n = 549),其中符合条件的患者(使用红细胞沉降率,DAS28-ESR> 3.2)对初始MTX单疗法,并随后接受MTX HCQ或MTX LEF。倾向得分匹配(PSM)被应用于调整两组之间可能的基线混音。主要结果是在日志等级试验后随访期间实现第一次缓解(DAS28-ESR <2.6)的患者的比例。二次结果是DAS28,糖皮质激素(GCS)暴露,安全性,成本效益,缓解和低疾病活动(LDA)率的变化,低于24个月后续后的疾病活动。结果:总体而言,222名符合条件的患者遭到上述患者两种治疗方案(MTX HCQ,N = 102; MTX LEF,N = 120)。 PSM调整后,分析了每组97例患者。在MTX HCQ组中观察到较高的缓解率,而不是MTX LEF组(70.1%Vs 56.7%,P = 0.048)。分别在两组中的中位时间为11和16个月。在终点,更多患者取得了缓解(46.8%Vs 32.5%,P = 0.063),并在HCQ组中维持持续的LDA(53.2%与38.6%,P = 0.062),并且更多患者在本集团中予以偿还GCS(32%)与莱佛集团中的人数为16.7%,p = 0.053)。安全型材是非报警,两组之间没有显着差异。 MTX HCQ OVER MTX LEF产生的增量成本效益率为每年质量调整的寿命(QALY)为1,111.8美元,以便在经济效益的阈值集中,作为中国人均国内生产总值(GDP)。结论:MTX HCQ组合似乎优于MTX LEF,其在患有疗效和成本效益方面对甲氨蝶呤单疗的反应不足的患者。 2020张等人。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号