首页> 外文期刊>Clinical Medicine Insights: Therapeutics >Rituximab for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
【24h】

Rituximab for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

机译:利妥昔单抗治疗类风湿关节炎的荟萃分析和系统评价

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Rituximab (RTX) is a biological agent used for the treatment of refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The present systematic review and meta-analysis update the safety and efficacy of RTX for the treatment of RA in data published since 2006.Methods: We searched PubMed from January 2000 to March 2010, and recent ACR Annual meeting abstracts for randomized (RCT) and non-randomized, controlled clinical trials (CCT) investigating the effects of RTX in RA. Included studies were at least six months, included participants who were ≥16 years of age meeting ACR revised criteria for RA, and compared RTX in combination with any DMARD or RTX alone versus placebo or other DMARDs or any biologic. Studies were excluded if they included patients previously exposed to RTX. Two reviewers independently extracted the data, and disagreement was resolved by discussion and consensus. The primary outcome was the Disease Activity Score (DAS28). The secondary outcome was American College of Rheumatology (ACR50) response. The efficacy results were combined in a meta-analysis. The primary endpoint was analyzed as a continuous variable using a random-effects analysis model to account for the fact that intervention effects were not uniform across all the studies. The secondary endpoint was analyzed as an odds ratio using the Mantel-Haenszel estimator under a random effects model to account for heterogenity in intervention effects across the studies. Descriptive statistics were used to compare adverse event (AE) rates and included both randomized and observational trials.Results: For the meta-analysis of efficacy, we initially examined 45 studies, devolving to 6 studies after applying inclusion/exclusion criteria. 5 were RCTs and 1 was a controlled clinical trial. Improvements in DAS28 and ACR50 statistically favored RTX (Figure 1). For the safety evaluation, 22 studies (5 RCTs and 17 observational studies) were examined. Infusion-related reactions were higher in the RTX group (mean: 28%) vs. placebo (18%). Overall infection incidence was similar for both groups (RTX: 39 vs. placebo: 40%).Conclusions: Our updated review supports RTX as a safe and efficacious therapy for treatment-na?ve and methotrexate and/or TNF-alpha refractory patients with RA. AE’s revealed no more frequent infections than control. Future trials need to assess the longer-term efficacy and safety of RTX for RA, as well as the optimal time of re-administration of this agent.
机译:背景:利妥昔单抗(RTX)是一种用于治疗难治性类风湿关节炎(RA)的生物制剂。本系统的综述和荟萃分析更新了自2006年以来发表的数据中RTX治疗RA的安全性和有效性。方法:我们检索了2000年1月至2010年3月的PubMed,以及最近的ACR年会的随机摘要(RCT)和一项非随机对照临床试验(CCT),研究RTX在RA中的作用。包括至少六个月的研究,包括年龄≥16岁且符合ACR修订的RA标准的参与者,并比较了RTX与任何DMARD或RTX单独与安慰剂或其他DMARD或任何生物制剂的组合。如果研究包括先前接触过RTX的患者,则将其排除在外。两名审稿人独立提取数据,并通过讨论和共识解决了分歧。主要结果是疾病活动评分(DAS28)。次要结果是美国风湿病学院(ACR50)的反应。疗效结果结合荟萃分析。使用随机效应分析模型将主要终点作为连续变量进行分析,以说明在所有研究中干预效果均不一致的事实。在随机效应模型下,使用Mantel-Haenszel估计量将次要终点作为优势比进行分析,以解释整个研究中干预效应的异质性。描述性统计数据用于比较不良事件(AE)发生率,包括随机试验和观察性试验。结果:为了进行荟萃分析,我们最初审查了45项研究,应用纳入/排除标准后降为6项研究。 5例是RCT,1例是对照临床试验。 DAS28和ACR50的改进在统计上有利于RTX(图1)。为了进行安全性评估,检查了22项研究(5项RCT和17项观察性研究)。 RTX组的输液相关反应更高(平均:28%),而安慰剂组(18%)更高。两组的总体感染发生率相似(RTX:39 vs.安慰剂:40%)。结论:我们的最新评价支持RTX作为初治和甲氨蝶呤和/或TNF-α难治性合并精神分裂症患者的安全有效方法RA。 AE的感染率没有比对照组高。未来的试验需要评估RTX对RA的长期疗效和安全性,以及该药物重新给药的最佳时间。

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