首页> 外文期刊>Arthritis research & therapy. >Head-to-head comparison of the safety of tocilizumab and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis patients (RA) in clinical practice: results from the registry of Japanese RA patients on biologics for long-term safety (REAL) registry
【24h】

Head-to-head comparison of the safety of tocilizumab and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis patients (RA) in clinical practice: results from the registry of Japanese RA patients on biologics for long-term safety (REAL) registry

机译:临床实践中类风湿性关节炎患者的幼鱼关节炎患者的安全性关节症和肿瘤坏死因子抑制剂的头脑比较:日本RA患者的长期安全性(REAL)登记的生物学注册表结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Introduction: The objective of this study was to directly compare the safety of tocilizumab (TCZ) and TNF inhibitors (TNFIs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in clinical practice. Methods: This prospective cohort study included RA patients starting TCZ [TCZ group, n?=?302, 224.68 patient-years (PY)] or TNFIs [TNFI group, n?=?304, 231.01 PY] from 2008 to 2011 in the registry of Japanese RA patients on biologics for long-term safety registry. We assessed types and incidence rates (IRs) of serious adverse events (SAEs) and serious infections (SIs) during the first year of treatment. Risks of the biologics for SAEs or SIs were calculated using the Cox regression hazard analysis. Results: Patients in the TCZ group had longer disease duration (P?<0.001), higher disease activity (P?=?0.019) and more frequently used concomitant corticosteroids (P?<0.001) than those in the TNFI group. The crude IR (/100 PY) of SIs [TCZ 10.68 vs. TNFI 3.03; IR ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]), 3.53 (1.52 to 8.18)], but not SAEs [21.36 vs. 14.72; 1.45 (0.94 to 2.25)], was significantly higher in the TCZ group compared with the TNFI group. However, after adjusting for covariates using the Cox regression hazard analysis, treatment with TCZ was not associated with higher risk for SAEs [hazard ratio (HR) 1.28, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.19] or SIs (HR 2.23, 95% CI 0.93 to 5.37). Conclusions: The adjusted risks for SAEs and SIs were not significantly different between TCZ and TNFIs, indicating an influence of clinical characteristics of the patients on the safety profile of the biologics in clinical practice.
机译:介绍:本研究的目的是直接比较临床实践中类风湿性关节炎(RA)患者在类风湿性关节炎(RNFIS)的安全性。方法:该预期队列研究包括启动TCZ患者[TCZ组,N吗?=?302,224.68患者 - 年(PY)]或TNFIS [TNFI Group,N?=?304,231.01 PY]在2008年至2011年日本RA患者注册表,用于长期安全登记处的生物学。我们在治疗的第一年评估了严重不良事件(SAES)和严重感染(SIS)的类型和发病率(IRS)。使用COX回归危害分析计算SAES或SIS的生物学的风险。结果:TCZ组患者患者患者持续时间较长(P?<0.001),疾病活动较高(P?= 0.019),更常用的Cortic类固醇(p≤0.<0.001),而不是TNFI组。 SIS [TCZ 10.68与TNFI 3.03的粗IR(/ 100 py); IR比(95%置信区间[CI]),3.53(1.52至8.18)],但不是SAE [21.36与14.72; 1.45(0.94至2.25)],与TNFI组相比,TCZ组显着高。然而,在使用COX回归危险分析调整协变量后,用TCZ的处理与SAES的风险较高无关[危险比(HR)1.28,95%CI 0.75至2.19]或SIS(HR 2.23,95%CI 0.93至5.37)。结论:TCZ和TNFI之间的SAE和SIS的调整后风险在显着差异,表明患者对临床实践中生物制剂安全性剖面的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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