Centre for Epidemiology Versus Arthritis, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Centre for Epidemiology Versus Arthritis, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom; Department of Rheumatology, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, United Kingdom.
Clin Ther. 2019 Jul;41(7):1376-1396. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.04.030. Epub 2019 Jun 10.
Treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over the last few decades have transformed the future outlook of the disease. Although patients with clinically apparent RA have a number of therapeutic options, all are associated with the risk of adverse events (AEs). Such therapeutics, facilitated by the identification of novel biomarkers and environmental and genetic factors to predict RA, may allow early detection, prompt treatment, and prevention before the future development of clinically apparent disease. Before choosing such treatments to make informed decisions in this context, however, accurate quantification of benefits and harms of such treatments is vital for participants without symptoms. This review summarizes the AEs reported in trials in preclinical or very early RA, the frequency and risk of primary AEs of concern associated with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (conventional, biologic, and targeted), glucocorticoids, and analgesia in clinically apparent RA. Also summarized is the evidence to date to support the quantification of benefit and harms incorporating patient preferences.
This analysis is a narrative review in which individual searches were performed in PubMed and EMBASE for each drug and topic outlined in the review.
Current therapies in RA can result in a considerable burden of AEs (serious and nonserious) depending on the individual's baseline risk. The absolute risk of serious AEs to treatments reported in individuals at risk of RA, undifferentiated, or very early inflammatory arthritis trials was low; however, nonserious AEs were not consistently reported. If such therapies prove effective at preventing the onset of RA in high-risk patients, incorporating patient preferences as well as robust quantification of benefits and harms to inform decisions is imperative. Patients' perceptions about treatment in this context may be risk averse or benefit driven. The risk of AEs that may not reverse after drug cessation, such as serious infection and malignancy, seem to be important AEs in such decision-making.
The impact of AEs in response to potentially preventative treatment is an important consideration for individuals at high risk of developing RA with minimal symptoms. Robust quantification of treatment effect given baseline risk versus the risks of developing all AEs (including those that may affect quality of life), while incorporating participants' views, will be necessary for future informed decision-making.
在过去几十年中,类风湿关节炎(RA)的治疗方法改变了该疾病的未来前景。尽管临床上明显的 RA 患者有许多治疗选择,但所有这些治疗都与不良事件(AE)的风险相关。通过鉴定新的生物标志物以及环境和遗传因素来预测 RA,此类治疗方法可能允许在临床明显疾病发生之前进行早期发现、及时治疗和预防。然而,在选择此类治疗方法以在这种情况下做出明智的决策之前,对于无症状的参与者来说,准确量化这些治疗方法的益处和危害至关重要。本综述总结了临床试验中报告的在临床前或非常早期 RA 中出现的 AE、与疾病修饰抗风湿药物(常规、生物制剂和靶向)、糖皮质激素和镇痛相关的主要关注 AE 的频率和风险在临床上明显的 RA 中。还总结了迄今为止支持纳入患者偏好的益处和危害量化的证据。
这是一项叙述性综述,其中对综述中概述的每种药物和主题在 PubMed 和 EMBASE 中进行了单独搜索。
根据个体的基线风险,RA 中的当前疗法可能会导致相当大的 AE(严重和非严重)负担。在患有 RA、未分化或非常早期炎症性关节炎的风险个体、试验中报告的严重 AE 的绝对风险较低;然而,非严重 AE 并未得到一致报告。如果此类治疗方法在高危患者中预防 RA 的发生证明是有效的,那么纳入患者的偏好以及对益处和危害的有力量化以做出决策是至关重要的。在这种情况下,患者对治疗的看法可能是规避风险或收益驱动的。在这种决策中,药物停止后可能无法逆转的 AE 风险(如严重感染和恶性肿瘤)似乎是重要的 AE。
对于仅有轻微症状但发生 RA 风险较高的个体,对潜在预防性治疗的 AE 影响的考虑是一个重要因素。对于基线风险与所有 AE(包括可能影响生活质量的 AE)的发展风险相比,对治疗效果进行有力的量化,同时纳入参与者的观点,对于未来的知情决策是必要的。