Literature DB >> 16447237

The LUNDEX, a new index of drug efficacy in clinical practice: results of a five-year observational study of treatment with infliximab and etanercept among rheumatoid arthritis patients in southern Sweden.

Lars Erik Kristensen1, Tore Saxne, Pierre Geborek.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of the LUNDEX, a new index for comparing the long-term efficacy and tolerability of biologic therapies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated in clinical practice.
METHODS: Patients (n = 949) with active RA that had not responded to at least 2 disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) including methotrexate, in whom biologic therapy was being initiated, were included in a structured clinical followup protocol. The protocol included collection of data on diagnosis, disease duration, previous and ongoing DMARD treatment, and dates on which biologic treatment was started and terminated. In addition, data on efficacy measures used for calculating validated response criteria, i.e., the European League Against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology response criteria, were collected at fixed time points. Data were prospectively registered from March 1999 through January 2004. The LUNDEX, a new index combining the proportion of patients fulfilling a selected response criteria set with the proportion of patients adhering to a particular therapy, was designed to compare the efficacy of the different therapies.
RESULTS: Etanercept had higher overall LUNDEX values compared with infliximab, mostly because of a lower rate of adherence to therapy with infliximab. The relationship between the drugs was consistent irrespective of the response criteria used.
CONCLUSION: The LUNDEX is a valuable tool for evaluating drug efficacy in observational studies. It has the advantage of integrating clinical response as well as adherence to therapy in a composite value. Moreover, the LUNDEX has a practical and potentially universal application independent of diagnosis and response criteria.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16447237     DOI: 10.1002/art.21570

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthritis Rheum        ISSN: 0004-3591


  26 in total

Review 1.  Observational studies: a valuable source for data on the true value of RA therapies.

Authors:  Ronald F van Vollenhoven; Johan L Severens
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2010-12-22       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  Differential drug resistance to anti-tumour necrosis factor agents in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  P I Sidiropoulos; D T Boumpas
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 19.103

3.  A Prospective Evaluation of the Effects of Prevalent Depressive Symptoms on Disease Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Treated With Biologic Response Modifiers.

Authors:  Alan M Rathbun; Leslie R Harrold; George W Reed
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 3.393

4.  Cost effectiveness of etoricoxib versus celecoxib and non-selective NSAIDS in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis.

Authors:  Jeroen P Jansen; Sabine Gaugris; Ernest H Choy; Andrew Ostor; Julian T Nash; Wiro Stam
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Comparative effectiveness of treatment options after conventional DMARDs failure in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Yoon-Kyoung Sung; Soo-Kyung Cho; Dam Kim; Chan-Bum Choi; Soyoung Won; So-Young Bang; Hoon-Suk Cha; Jung-Yoon Choe; Won Tae Chung; Seung-Jae Hong; Jae-Bum Jun; Hyoun Ah Kim; Jinseok Kim; Seong-Kyu Kim; Tae-Hwan Kim; Hye-Soon Lee; Jaejoon Lee; Jisoo Lee; Shin-Seok Lee; Sung Won Lee; Yeon-Ah Lee; Seong-Su Nah; Chang-Hee Suh; Dae-Hyun Yoo; Bo Young Yoon; Sang Cheol Bae
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2017-01-28       Impact factor: 2.631

6.  Body mass does not impact the clinical response to intravenous abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Analysis from the "pan-European registry collaboration for abatacept (PANABA).

Authors:  Florenzo Iannone; Delphine S Courvoisier; Jacques Eric Gottenberg; Maria Victoria Hernandez; Elisabeth Lie; Helena Canhão; Karel Pavelka; Merete Lund Hetland; Carl Turesson; Xavier Mariette; Denis Choquette; Axel Finckh
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 2.980

7.  Second-line therapy with biological drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients in German rheumatologist practices: a retrospective database analysis.

Authors:  Nina Gossen; Louis Jacob; Karel Kostev
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2016-03-02       Impact factor: 2.631

8.  Drug survival and effectiveness of ustekinumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis. Real-life data from the biologic Apulian registry (BIOPURE).

Authors:  Florenzo Iannone; Leonardo Santo; Romano Bucci; Angelo Semeraro; Giorgio Carlino; Franco Paoletti; Laura Quarta; Pierfrancesco Leucci; Carmelo Zuccaro; Antonio Marsico; Crescenzio Scioscia; Francesca D'Onofrio; Daniela Mazzotta; Maurizio Muratore; Francesco Paolo Cantatore; Giovanni Lapadula
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 9.  Etanercept: a review of its use in the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Sohita Dhillon; Katherine A Lyseng-Williamson; Lesley J Scott
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.546

10.  Medication persistence over 2 years of follow-up in a cohort of early rheumatoid arthritis patients: associated factors and relationship with disease activity and with disability.

Authors:  Virginia Pascual-Ramos; Irazú Contreras-Yáñez; Antonio R Villa; Javier Cabiedes; Marina Rull-Gabayet
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2009-02-19       Impact factor: 5.156

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.