scholarly journals Comparative effectiveness of treatment with the first TNF antagonist in monotherapy, the first TNF antagonist plus one conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, and the first TNF antagonist plus two or more conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Blanca Hernández-Cruz ◽  
Esther Márquez-Saavedra ◽  
Rafael Caliz-Caliz ◽  
Federico Navarro-Sarabia
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Yoshifumi Tada ◽  
Nobuyuki Ono ◽  
Syuichi Koarada

Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are very effective for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, they sometimes induce adverse events such as psoriasis-like skin lesions. We describe psoriasis-like skin lesions that developed simultaneously with an RA flare in patient 1 during treatment with abatacept and in patient 2 soon after starting certolizumab pegol. The skin lesions persisted in patient 2 despite stopping certolizumab. Baricitinib was initiated because of RA flare and resulted in immediate beneficial effects on arthritis as well as skin lesions. The RA went into remission in both patients, and the psoriasis-like skin lesions disappeared within four weeks (patient 1) and three months (patient 2).


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesse Elliot ◽  
Tessa Cornelissen ◽  
Bernice Tsoi ◽  
Karen Lee

There is variation across Canadian jurisdictions in time to the initiation of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) therapy among adults with rheumatoid arthritis. From a pan-Canadian perspective, harmonizing time to bDMARD initiation across jurisdictions may result in savings to publicly funded drug plans in some jurisdictions but increased drug expenditures in others. The extent of savings or increased costs is dependent on jurisdiction, the number of new bDMARD users, and whether patients receive a biosimilar or originator bDMARD.


2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
ESI MORGAN DEWITT ◽  
YANHONG LI ◽  
JEFFREY R. CURTIS ◽  
HENRY A. GLICK ◽  
JEFFREY D. GREENBERG ◽  
...  

Objective.To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) versus biologic DMARD (bDMARD) for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), using 2 common analytic approaches.Methods.We analyzed change in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) scores in patients with RA enrolled in a US-based observational registry from 2001 to 2008 using multivariable (MV) regression and propensity score (PS) matching. Among patients who initiated treatment with a nonbiologic DMARD (n = 1729), we compared patients who switched to, or added, another nonbiologic (n = 182) or a bDMARD (n = 342) at 5, 9, and 24 months after treatment change.Results.Both analytic approaches showed that patients switching to or adding another nonbiologic DMARD demonstrated improvement across 9 and 24 months (both p < 0.001). Both approaches also demonstrated greater improvement in CDAI among recipients of bDMARD relative to a second nonbiologic DMARD at 5 months (p < 0.02). The MV regression approach upheld these results at 9 and 24 months (p < 0.03). In contrast, the PS-matching approach did not show a sustained advantage with bDMARD at these later timepoints, possibly because of lower statistical power and/or lower baseline disease activity in the PS-matched cohort.Conclusion.Patients in both treatment groups generally experienced lower CDAI scores across time. Patients switching to bDMARD demonstrated greater improvement than patients switching to nonbiologic DMARD with both analytic approaches at 5 months. Relative advantages with bDMARD were observed at 9 and 24 months only with MV regression. These analyses provide a practical example of how findings in comparative effectiveness research can diverge with different methodological approaches.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document