MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.jaad.2014.08.003

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2014

Comparative effectiveness of less commonly used systemic monotherapies and common combination therapies for moderate to severe psoriasis in the clinical setting.

Takeshita Junko, Wang Shuwei, Shin Daniel B, Callis Duffin Kristina, Krueger Gerald G, Kalb Robert E, Weisman Jamie D, Sperber Brian R, Stierstorfer Michael B, Brod Bruce A, Schleicher Stephen M, Robertson Andrew D, Linn Kristin A, Shinohara Russell T, Troxel Andrea B, Van Voorhees Abby S, Gelfand Joel M

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of psoriasis therapies in real-world settings remains relatively unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare the effectiveness of less commonly used systemic therapies and commonly used combination therapies for psoriasis.

METHODS

This was a multicenter cross-sectional study of 203 patients with plaque psoriasis receiving less common systemic monotherapy (acitretin, cyclosporine, or infliximab) or common combination therapies (adalimumab, etanercept, or infliximab and methotrexate) compared with 168 patients receiving methotrexate evaluated at 1 of 10 US outpatient dermatology sites participating in the Dermatology Clinical Effectiveness Research Network.

RESULTS

In adjusted analyses, patients on acitretin (relative response rate 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-3.41), infliximab (relative response rate 1.93; 95% CI 1.26-2.98), adalimumab and methotrexate (relative response rate 3.04; 95% CI 2.12-4.36), etanercept and methotrexate (relative response rate 2.22; 95% CI 1.25-3.94), and infliximab and methotrexate (relative response rate 1.72; 95% CI 1.10-2.70) were more likely to have clear or almost clear skin compared with patients on methotrexate. There were no differences among treatments when response rate was defined by health-related quality of life.

LIMITATIONS: Single time point assessment may result in overestimation of effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of therapies in clinical trials may overestimate their effectiveness as used in clinical practice. Although physician-reported relative response rates were different among therapies, absolute differences were small and did not correspond to differences in patient-reported outcomes.

Для цитирования: Takeshita Junko, Wang Shuwei, Shin Daniel B, Callis Duffin Kristina, Krueger Gerald G, Kalb Robert E, Weisman Jamie D, Sperber Brian R, Stierstorfer Michael B, Brod Bruce A, Schleicher Stephen M, Robertson Andrew D, Linn Kristin A, Shinohara Russell T, Troxel Andrea B, Van Voorhees Abby S, Gelfand Joel M. Comparative effectiveness of less commonly used systemic monotherapies and common combination therapies for moderate to severe psoriasis in the clinical setting.. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2014. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2014.08.003.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.