Naïve vs. switchers differences in treatment effectiveness in spondyloarthritis

Q4 Medicine
Irina Andrada Craciun, Relu Liviu Craciun, S. Daia-Iliescu, R. Ionescu
{"title":"Naïve vs. switchers differences in treatment effectiveness in spondyloarthritis","authors":"Irina Andrada Craciun, Relu Liviu Craciun, S. Daia-Iliescu, R. Ionescu","doi":"10.37897/rjr.2021.2.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Treat-to-target concept in spondyloarthritis (SpA) is a highly disputed subject. Up to the present, there is no evaluation score that integrates the clinical and laboratory/imaging results for defining remission in SpA. This issue generates the need of identifying predictive factors of remission in SpA patients. Aim. The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of the biological treatment upon naïve patients versus switchers and to identify some difficulties in achieving remission. Material and method. 65 patients with SpA were enrolled in this retrospective study, using data from multiple-choice forms and medical reports from University Hospitals in Romania, between 2019-2021. Results. 65 patients with SpA, in treatment with one biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) were available for the baseline analysis. They were distributed into 3 groups, whether they changed the biological therapy: group 1 – naïve patients, group 2 – first-time switchers and group 3 – more than one-time switchers. BASDAI and ASDAS were calculated at baseline, 24 and 52 weeks for the 3 groups. The scores were higher for the switchers and the highest in the 3rd group. Retention time of the first bDMARD was compared between groups and between the biological therapies. Conclusions. Results showed that the best treatment response, as well as effectiveness, is reached by the naïve patients group. Greater retention time rate for the first bDMARD is associated with a greater chance of achieving remission.","PeriodicalId":33518,"journal":{"name":"Revista Romana de Reumatologie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Romana de Reumatologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37897/rjr.2021.2.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. Treat-to-target concept in spondyloarthritis (SpA) is a highly disputed subject. Up to the present, there is no evaluation score that integrates the clinical and laboratory/imaging results for defining remission in SpA. This issue generates the need of identifying predictive factors of remission in SpA patients. Aim. The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of the biological treatment upon naïve patients versus switchers and to identify some difficulties in achieving remission. Material and method. 65 patients with SpA were enrolled in this retrospective study, using data from multiple-choice forms and medical reports from University Hospitals in Romania, between 2019-2021. Results. 65 patients with SpA, in treatment with one biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) were available for the baseline analysis. They were distributed into 3 groups, whether they changed the biological therapy: group 1 – naïve patients, group 2 – first-time switchers and group 3 – more than one-time switchers. BASDAI and ASDAS were calculated at baseline, 24 and 52 weeks for the 3 groups. The scores were higher for the switchers and the highest in the 3rd group. Retention time of the first bDMARD was compared between groups and between the biological therapies. Conclusions. Results showed that the best treatment response, as well as effectiveness, is reached by the naïve patients group. Greater retention time rate for the first bDMARD is associated with a greater chance of achieving remission.
Naïve与switchers治疗脊椎关节炎疗效的差异
介绍。治疗目标的概念在脊椎关节炎(SpA)是一个高度争议的主题。到目前为止,还没有一个综合临床和实验室/影像学结果的评估评分来定义SpA的缓解。这一问题产生了识别SpA患者缓解的预测因素的需求。的目标。本研究的目的是评估naïve患者与转换者生物治疗的有效性,并确定实现缓解的一些困难。材料和方法。这项回顾性研究纳入了65名SpA患者,使用了2019-2021年间罗马尼亚大学医院的多项选择表格和医疗报告的数据。结果:65例SpA患者接受一种生物疾病缓解抗风湿药物(bDMARD)治疗,可用于基线分析。根据是否改变生物疗法,将患者分为3组:1组(naïve患者)、2组(首次转换者)和3组(超过一次转换者)。3组分别在基线、24周和52周计算BASDAI和ASDAS。转换组的得分更高,第三组的得分最高。比较两组间及两种生物疗法间首次bDMARD的滞留时间。结论。结果显示,naïve患者组的治疗效果最好。首次bDMARD的保留时间越长,获得缓解的机会越大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信