Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026
A retrospective observational study of effectiveness of sequential biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs in psoriatic arthritis in the UK.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gollins Charlotte E, Russell Annie, Smith Theresa, Vivekanantham Arani, Brooke Mel, Coates Laura C, Gullick Nicola, Helliwell Philip, McHugh Neil, Fahy Caoimhe, Tillett William, SEQUENCE Study Group
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Evidence evaluating effectiveness of biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs) in adults with PsA after exposure to three or more b/tsDMARDs is lacking. We aimed to evaluate response to sequential lines of b/tsDMARDs.
METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective observational study, 22 hospitals submitted data from routine clinic appointments of patients with PsA treated with b/tsDMARDs. Purposive sampling obtained a study population exposed to advanced lines of therapy. Effectiveness outcome measures (Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria [PsARC]/tender joint count [TJC]/swollen joint count [SJC]) at baseline and first follow-up (12-16 weeks) for each line were recorded. Odds of achieving PsARC in 2nd/3rd line were compared with 4th+ line.
RESULTS: Four hundred and thirty-seven participants (163 male, 274 female) and 1459 treatment courses were included: 430 1st line, 633 2nd/3rd line and 396 4th+ line. The adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) for achieving PsARC in 1st line vs 2nd/3rd line was 1.91 (1.40, 2.60) and 4th+ line vs 2nd/3rd line was 1.13 (0.84, 1.55). There was no significant difference in change from baseline TJC/SJC between 2nd/3rd and 4th+ lines.
CONCLUSION: In this cohort the highest chance of a positive PsARC response was to 1st line b/tsDMARD: twice the chance of response vs 2nd/3rd line. The chance of a positive PsARC response to 4th+ lines of b/tsDMARD was not significantly different from 2nd/3rd lines after adjustment. This indicates that patients in a UK cohort can continue to have a meaningful response to later lines of treatment. This is the first available evidence of response to later lines of b/tsDMARD treatment in PsA.
METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective observational study, 22 hospitals submitted data from routine clinic appointments of patients with PsA treated with b/tsDMARDs. Purposive sampling obtained a study population exposed to advanced lines of therapy. Effectiveness outcome measures (Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria [PsARC]/tender joint count [TJC]/swollen joint count [SJC]) at baseline and first follow-up (12-16 weeks) for each line were recorded. Odds of achieving PsARC in 2nd/3rd line were compared with 4th+ line.
RESULTS: Four hundred and thirty-seven participants (163 male, 274 female) and 1459 treatment courses were included: 430 1st line, 633 2nd/3rd line and 396 4th+ line. The adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) for achieving PsARC in 1st line vs 2nd/3rd line was 1.91 (1.40, 2.60) and 4th+ line vs 2nd/3rd line was 1.13 (0.84, 1.55). There was no significant difference in change from baseline TJC/SJC between 2nd/3rd and 4th+ lines.
CONCLUSION: In this cohort the highest chance of a positive PsARC response was to 1st line b/tsDMARD: twice the chance of response vs 2nd/3rd line. The chance of a positive PsARC response to 4th+ lines of b/tsDMARD was not significantly different from 2nd/3rd lines after adjustment. This indicates that patients in a UK cohort can continue to have a meaningful response to later lines of treatment. This is the first available evidence of response to later lines of b/tsDMARD treatment in PsA.