...
首页> 外文期刊>Nature clinical practice. Rheumatology >How do the efficacy and safety of abatacept and infliximab compare in the treatment of active RA?
【24h】

How do the efficacy and safety of abatacept and infliximab compare in the treatment of active RA?

机译:阿巴西普和英夫利昔单抗治疗活动性RA的疗效和安全性如何比较?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Since the introduction of biologic therapies that target tumor necrosis factor (TNF), short-term and long-term outlooks for many patients with rheumatoid arthritis have greatly improved. Not all patients, however, respond to therapy with these agents. Furthermore, despite favorable overall profiles for safety and tolerability, some concerns remain in this regard. Following the emergence of next-generation biologic agents with new targets, a key question for clinicians concerns the relative efficacy and safety of the different biologic therapies. A study by Schiff et al. directly compared the biologic T-cell costimulation blocker abatacept and the anti-TNF agent infliximab. The results of the 6-month, placebo-controlled trial demonstrated a similar efficacy for both drugs; however, in the 6-month treatment extension period, outcomes of efficacy differed in favor of abatacept. Overall, abatacept had a relatively more-acceptable safety and tolerability profile compared to infliximab.
机译:自从引入针对肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)的生物疗法以来,许多类风湿关节炎患者的短期和长期前景都得到了极大的改善。但是,并非所有患者都对使用这些药物的治疗有反应。此外,尽管在安全性和耐受性方面总体上有利,但在这方面仍存在一些担忧。随着具有新目标的下一代生物制剂的出现,临床医生面临的一个关键问题是不同生物疗法的相对效力和安全性。 Schiff等人的研究。直接比较了生物T细胞共刺激阻滞剂abatacept和抗TNF药物英夫利昔单抗。为期6个月的安慰剂对照试验结果表明,两种药物的疗效相似。然而,在6个月的治疗延长期中,疗效的结果因abatacept而不同。总体而言,与英夫利昔单抗相比,阿巴西普具有相对更可接受的安全性和耐受性。

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