Clinical and experimental rheumatology · 2022
Switching from intravenous tocilizumab to subcutaneous administration during COVID-19 pandemic: impact on treatment efficacy and patient satisfaction.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Daood Rula, Toledano Kochava, Markovits Doron, Tavor Yonit, Giryes Samy, Dolnikov Katya, Jeries Helani, Balbir-Gurman Alexandra, Braun-Moscovici Yolanda
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the efficacy and patient satisfaction of subcutaneous tocilizumab (SC TCZ) in patients previously treated with intravenous tocilizumab (IV TCZ) during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS: We conducted a single-centre retrospective study at the Rheumatology Day Care at the Rheumatology Institute, Rambam Health Care Campus, Israel. Clinical and laboratory data of IV TCZ treated patients who switched to SC TCZ were retracted and analysed. Data were collected from the last two visits before switching to SC treatment and two visits afterwards. A telephone call conversation was conducted for all patients who continued SC treatment and did not come to follow-up visits.
RESULTS: Forty patients (age 53.03 (± 15.7)) treated with IV TCZ were switched to SC TCZ in April-May 2020. Three patients were excluded from the study. Most of the patients were treated with TCZ for 6.35 (±2.89) years and had low disease activity. 26/37 (70%) patients discontinued SC TCZ therapy and switched back to IV TCZ. The majority of discontinuations were due to flare up of the underlying disease reflected by increased number of tender and/or swollen joints, prolongation of morning stiffness or increased pain VAS score. Two patients were hospitalised for IV glucocorticoids and 1 patient underwent knee arthrocentesis. 11/37 (30%) patients continued SC TCZ treatment. 3/11 (27%) expressed less satisfaction with SC TCZ therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the patients who switched from IV TCZ to SC TCZ showed signs of flare of their underlying disease or were less satisfied with SC treatment.
METHODS: We conducted a single-centre retrospective study at the Rheumatology Day Care at the Rheumatology Institute, Rambam Health Care Campus, Israel. Clinical and laboratory data of IV TCZ treated patients who switched to SC TCZ were retracted and analysed. Data were collected from the last two visits before switching to SC treatment and two visits afterwards. A telephone call conversation was conducted for all patients who continued SC treatment and did not come to follow-up visits.
RESULTS: Forty patients (age 53.03 (± 15.7)) treated with IV TCZ were switched to SC TCZ in April-May 2020. Three patients were excluded from the study. Most of the patients were treated with TCZ for 6.35 (±2.89) years and had low disease activity. 26/37 (70%) patients discontinued SC TCZ therapy and switched back to IV TCZ. The majority of discontinuations were due to flare up of the underlying disease reflected by increased number of tender and/or swollen joints, prolongation of morning stiffness or increased pain VAS score. Two patients were hospitalised for IV glucocorticoids and 1 patient underwent knee arthrocentesis. 11/37 (30%) patients continued SC TCZ treatment. 3/11 (27%) expressed less satisfaction with SC TCZ therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the patients who switched from IV TCZ to SC TCZ showed signs of flare of their underlying disease or were less satisfied with SC treatment.