27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Safety of synthetic and biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2013 update of the EULAR recommendations for management of rheumatoid arthritis.

      Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
      Antirheumatic Agents, adverse effects, therapeutic use, Arthritis, Rheumatoid, drug therapy, Biological Products, Evidence-Based Medicine, methods, Humans, Neoplasms, chemically induced, Opportunistic Infections, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Risk Assessment, Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha, antagonists & inhibitors

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          To update the evidence for the safety of synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (sDMARDs), glucocorticoids (GC) and biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to inform the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of RA. Systematic literature review (SLR) of observational studies (including registries). Interventions were any bDMARD (anakinra, infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, rituximab, abatacept, tocilizumab, golimumab or certolizumab pegol) or sDMARD (methotrexate, leflunomide, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, gold/auranofin, azathioprine, chlorambucil, chloroquine, cyclosporin, cyclophosphamide, mycophenolate, minocycline, penicillamine, tacrolimus or tofacitinib) and a comparator was required. Information on GCs was collected from the included studies. All safety outcomes were included. Forty-nine observational studies addressing diverse safety outcomes of therapy with bDMARDs met eligibility criteria. Substantial heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis of any of the outcomes. Patients on tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) compared to patients on conventional sDMARDs had a higher risk of serious infections (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.1-1.8), a higher risk of tuberculosis, and an increased risk of infection by herpes zoster cannot be excluded. Patients on TNFi did not have an increased risk for malignancies in general, lymphoma or non-melanoma skin cancer, but the risk of melanoma may be slightly increased (aHR 1.5). From the studies identified on conventional sDMARDs, no new safety signals were found. The findings from this SLR confirm the known safety pattern of sDMARDs and bDMARDs for the treatment of RA.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article