Suppr超能文献

生物疗法对类风湿性关节炎患者的真实世界疗效:系统评价与荟萃分析。

Real-world effectiveness of biological therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

de Castro Caroline Tianeze, de Queiroz Mariana Jorge, Albuquerque Flavia Caixeta, Brandão Celmário Castro, Gerlack Leticia Farias, Pereira Daniella Cristina Rodrigues, Barros Sandra Castro, Andrade Wenderson Walla, Bastos Ediane de Assis, Azevedo Jessé de Nobrega Batista, Carreiro Roberto, Barreto Mauricio Lima, Dos Santos Djanilson Barbosa

机构信息

Institute of Collective Health, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil.

Department of Pharmaceutical Assistance and Strategic Inputs, Ministry of Health, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

出版信息

Front Pharmacol. 2022 Aug 11;13:927179. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.927179. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a chronic systemic inflammatory autoimmune disease, is based on disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Typically, it starts with conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs), and depending on the patient's response to the treatment and the adverse events experienced, biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) are initiated. bDMARDs are more specific to inflammatory factors than csDMARDs and more efficient in inducing remission and low disease activity. Thus, this study aimed to assess the effectiveness of biological therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in administrative health databases. PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, Ovid, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to 21 October 2021, to identify observational studies that evaluated the effectiveness of biological therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis using administrative databases and real-world data. The methodological quality was assessed by the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). A fixed or random-effects model estimated risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. The analysis was divided into four groups: tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) versus non-TNFi; TNFi versus TNFi (adalimumab, etanercept, and golimumab versus infliximab); bDMARDs versus Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi); and bDMARDs monotherapy versus combination therapy (bDMARDs and MTX). Twenty-one records were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis; seven population-based cohorts, eight prospective, and six retrospective cohort studies. Overall, 182,098 rheumatoid arthritis patients were evaluated. In the meta-analysis, lower effectiveness was observed among TNFi users than in non-TNFi (RR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.81-0.95; < 0.01; I = 94.0%) and bDMARDs than in JAKi (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.79-0.94; < 0.01; I = 93.0%). Higher effectiveness among adalimumab, etanercept, and golimumab than in infliximab (RR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.05-1.36; < 0.01; I = 96.0%) was found. No significant differences in the effectiveness of bDMARD monotherapy compared to combination therapy (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.68-1.00; < 0.01; I = 81.0%) was observed. E-value analysis indicated that the estimates were not robust against unmeasured confounding. According to the available real-world data, our results suggest that biological therapy effectively treats patients with rheumatoid arthritis, indicating higher effectiveness with non-TNFi and JAKi than with TNFi. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID#CRD42020190838, identifier CRD42020190838.

摘要

类风湿关节炎(RA)是一种慢性全身性炎症性自身免疫性疾病,其治疗基于改善病情抗风湿药(DMARDs)。通常,治疗从传统合成DMARDs(csDMARDs)开始,并根据患者对治疗的反应和所经历的不良事件,启动生物DMARDs(bDMARDs)。bDMARDs比csDMARDs对炎症因子更具特异性,在诱导缓解和低疾病活动度方面更有效。因此,本研究旨在评估行政卫生数据库中类风湿关节炎患者生物治疗的有效性。检索了PubMed、Embase、Lilacs、Ovid、Scopus和Web of Science数据库,从建库至2021年10月21日,以确定使用行政数据库和真实世界数据评估类风湿关节炎患者生物治疗有效性的观察性研究。采用非随机研究方法学指数(MINORS)评估方法学质量。固定效应或随机效应模型估计风险比及95%置信区间。分析分为四组:肿瘤坏死因子抑制剂(TNFi)与非TNFi;TNFi与TNFi(阿达木单抗、依那西普和戈利木单抗与英夫利昔单抗);bDMARDs与 Janus激酶抑制剂(JAKi);以及bDMARDs单药治疗与联合治疗(bDMARDs与甲氨蝶呤)。21条记录符合纳入本系统评价和荟萃分析的条件;7项基于人群的队列研究、8项前瞻性队列研究和6项回顾性队列研究。总共评估了182,098例类风湿关节炎患者。在荟萃分析中,观察到TNFi使用者的有效性低于非TNFi使用者(RR:0.88;95%CI:0.81 - 0.95;P<0.01;I² = 94.0%),bDMARDs使用者的有效性低于JAKi使用者(RR:0.86;95%CI:0.79 - 0.94;P<0.01;I² = 93.0%)。发现阿达木单抗、依那西普和戈利木单抗的有效性高于英夫利昔单抗(RR:1.19;95%CI:1.05 - 1.36;P<0.01;I² = 96.0%)。未观察到bDMARDs单药治疗与联合治疗的有效性有显著差异(RR:0.83;95%CI:0.68 - 1.00;P<0.01;I² = 81.0%)。E值分析表明,这些估计值对未测量的混杂因素不稳健。根据现有的真实世界数据,我们的结果表明生物治疗可有效治疗类风湿关节炎患者,表明非TNFi和JAKi的有效性高于TNFi。https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID#CRD42020190838,标识符CRD42020190838。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27ea/9402894/2fff412c4702/fphar-13-927179-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验