首页> 外文期刊>Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases: A Journal of Clinical Rheumatology and Connective Tissue Research >Comparative effectiveness and safety of biological treatment options after tumour necrosis factor α inhibitor failure in rheumatoid arthritis: Systematic review and indirect pairwise meta-analysis
【24h】

Comparative effectiveness and safety of biological treatment options after tumour necrosis factor α inhibitor failure in rheumatoid arthritis: Systematic review and indirect pairwise meta-analysis

机译:类风湿关节炎中肿瘤坏死因子α抑制剂失败后生物治疗方案的比较有效性和安全性:系统评价和间接成对荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Optimal treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after inadequate response (IR) to tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFi) remains uncertain. Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of biological agents after TNFi-IR. Methods: A systematic literature search was carried out using Medline and Cochrane databases, as well as http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, and bibliographies of the retrieved literature were searched by hand. Randomised, placebo-controlled trials that enrolled patients with RA with TNFi-IR were included and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response as primary efficacy outcome and adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs) and serious infections (SIs) as safety measures were extracted. An indirect meta-analysis with pairwise comparisons of efficacy and safety data was then carried out using ORs or risk differences (RDs) in a random effects model. Results: In four randomised controlled trials with 24 weeks' follow-up, direct comparisons of abatacept, golimumab, rituximab and tocilizumab versus placebo showed statistically significant mean ORs of 3.3-8.9 for ACR20, 5.5-10.2 for ACR50 and 4.1-13.5 for ACR70. Risks of AEs, SAEs and SIs versus placebo were non-significant. Indirect pairwise comparisons of the four biological agents showed no significant differences in ACR50 and ACR70. Golimumab had a significantly lower OR (0.56-0.59) for ACR20 but significantly fewer AEs (RD 0.13-0.18). Efficacy after one versus multiple TNFi failures did not differ significantly between the different biological agents. Conclusion In patients refractory to one or more TNFi, new biological agents provide significant improvement with good safety. Lacking head-to-head trials, indirect meta-analysis enables a comparison of effectiveness and safety of biological agents with each other and shows that all biological agents have similar effects.
机译:背景:对肿瘤坏死因子α抑制剂(TNFi)的反应不充分(IR)后,对类风湿关节炎(RA)的最佳治疗仍不确定。目的:比较TNFi-IR后生物制剂的疗效和安全性。方法:使用Medline和Cochrane数据库以及http://www.clinicaltrials.gov进行系统的文献检索,并手工检索检索到的文献的书目。纳入随机性,安慰剂对照试验,该试验招募了患有TNFi-IR的RA患者,美国风湿病学会(ACR)反应作为主要疗效结果,不良事件(AEs),严重不良事件(SAEs)和严重感染(SIs)提取安全措施。然后在随机效应模型中使用OR或风险差异(RD)进行疗效和安全性数据成对比较的间接荟萃分析。结果:在四个为期24周的随机对照试验中,对abatacept,golimumab,rituximab和tocilizumab与安慰剂进行直接比较,结果显示ACR20的平均平均OR为3.3-8.9,ACR50的平均OR为5.5-10.2,ACR70的平均值为4.1-13.5。 。与安慰剂相比,AE,SAE和SI的风险不显着。四种生物制剂的间接成对比较显示ACR50和ACR70没有显着差异。戈利木单抗对ACR20的OR显着降低(0.56-0.59),但AE的显着降低(RD 0.13-0.18)。不同生物制剂之间,一种或多种TNFi失败后的疗效无显着差异。结论对于一种或多种TNFi难治的患者,新的生物制剂可显着改善病情,并具有良好的安全性。缺乏直接的试验,间接荟萃分析可以比较生物制剂的有效性和安全性,并表明所有生物制剂具有相似的作用。

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