Cargando…
Infections in Biological and Targeted Synthetic Drug Use in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Where do We Stand? A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis
INTRODUCTION: The advent of biological and targeted synthetic therapies has revolutionized rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. However, this has come at the price of an increased risk of infections. The aim of this study was to present an integrated overview of both serious and non-serious infectio...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10469142/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37365454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40744-023-00571-z |
_version_ | 1785099378377097216 |
---|---|
author | Bergmans, Barbara J. M. Gebeyehu, Biniyam Y. van Puijenbroek, Eugène P. Van Deun, Katrijn Kleinberg, Bennett Murk, Jean-Luc de Vries, Esther |
author_facet | Bergmans, Barbara J. M. Gebeyehu, Biniyam Y. van Puijenbroek, Eugène P. Van Deun, Katrijn Kleinberg, Bennett Murk, Jean-Luc de Vries, Esther |
author_sort | Bergmans, Barbara J. M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The advent of biological and targeted synthetic therapies has revolutionized rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. However, this has come at the price of an increased risk of infections. The aim of this study was to present an integrated overview of both serious and non-serious infections, and to identify potential predictors of infection risk in RA patients using biological or targeted synthetic drugs. METHODS: We systematically reviewed available literature from PubMed and Cochrane and performed multivariate meta-analysis with meta-regression on the reported infections. Randomized controlled trials and prospective and retrospective observational studies including patient registry studies were analyzed, combined as well as separately. We excluded studies focusing on viral infections only. RESULTS: Infections were not reported in a standardized manner. Meta-analysis showed significant heterogeneity that persisted after forming subgroups by study design and follow-up duration. Overall, the pooled proportions of patients experiencing an infection during a study were 0.30 (95% CI, 0.28–0.33) and 0.03 (95% CI, 0.028–0.035) for any kind of infections or serious infections only, respectively. We found no potential predictors that were consistent across all study subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The high heterogeneity and the inconsistency of potential predictors between studies show that we do not yet have a complete picture of infection risk in RA patients using biological or targeted synthetic drugs. Besides, we found non-serious infections outnumbered serious infections by a factor 10:1, but only a few studies have focused on their occurrence. Future studies should apply a uniform method of infectious adverse event reporting and also focus on non-serious infections and their impact on treatment decisions and quality of life. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-023-00571-z. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10469142 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104691422023-09-01 Infections in Biological and Targeted Synthetic Drug Use in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Where do We Stand? A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis Bergmans, Barbara J. M. Gebeyehu, Biniyam Y. van Puijenbroek, Eugène P. Van Deun, Katrijn Kleinberg, Bennett Murk, Jean-Luc de Vries, Esther Rheumatol Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: The advent of biological and targeted synthetic therapies has revolutionized rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. However, this has come at the price of an increased risk of infections. The aim of this study was to present an integrated overview of both serious and non-serious infections, and to identify potential predictors of infection risk in RA patients using biological or targeted synthetic drugs. METHODS: We systematically reviewed available literature from PubMed and Cochrane and performed multivariate meta-analysis with meta-regression on the reported infections. Randomized controlled trials and prospective and retrospective observational studies including patient registry studies were analyzed, combined as well as separately. We excluded studies focusing on viral infections only. RESULTS: Infections were not reported in a standardized manner. Meta-analysis showed significant heterogeneity that persisted after forming subgroups by study design and follow-up duration. Overall, the pooled proportions of patients experiencing an infection during a study were 0.30 (95% CI, 0.28–0.33) and 0.03 (95% CI, 0.028–0.035) for any kind of infections or serious infections only, respectively. We found no potential predictors that were consistent across all study subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The high heterogeneity and the inconsistency of potential predictors between studies show that we do not yet have a complete picture of infection risk in RA patients using biological or targeted synthetic drugs. Besides, we found non-serious infections outnumbered serious infections by a factor 10:1, but only a few studies have focused on their occurrence. Future studies should apply a uniform method of infectious adverse event reporting and also focus on non-serious infections and their impact on treatment decisions and quality of life. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-023-00571-z. Springer Healthcare 2023-06-26 /pmc/articles/PMC10469142/ /pubmed/37365454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40744-023-00571-z Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Bergmans, Barbara J. M. Gebeyehu, Biniyam Y. van Puijenbroek, Eugène P. Van Deun, Katrijn Kleinberg, Bennett Murk, Jean-Luc de Vries, Esther Infections in Biological and Targeted Synthetic Drug Use in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Where do We Stand? A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis |
title | Infections in Biological and Targeted Synthetic Drug Use in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Where do We Stand? A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis |
title_full | Infections in Biological and Targeted Synthetic Drug Use in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Where do We Stand? A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Infections in Biological and Targeted Synthetic Drug Use in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Where do We Stand? A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Infections in Biological and Targeted Synthetic Drug Use in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Where do We Stand? A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis |
title_short | Infections in Biological and Targeted Synthetic Drug Use in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Where do We Stand? A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis |
title_sort | infections in biological and targeted synthetic drug use in rheumatoid arthritis: where do we stand? a scoping review and meta-analysis |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10469142/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37365454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40744-023-00571-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bergmansbarbarajm infectionsinbiologicalandtargetedsyntheticdruguseinrheumatoidarthritiswheredowestandascopingreviewandmetaanalysis AT gebeyehubiniyamy infectionsinbiologicalandtargetedsyntheticdruguseinrheumatoidarthritiswheredowestandascopingreviewandmetaanalysis AT vanpuijenbroekeugenep infectionsinbiologicalandtargetedsyntheticdruguseinrheumatoidarthritiswheredowestandascopingreviewandmetaanalysis AT vandeunkatrijn infectionsinbiologicalandtargetedsyntheticdruguseinrheumatoidarthritiswheredowestandascopingreviewandmetaanalysis AT kleinbergbennett infectionsinbiologicalandtargetedsyntheticdruguseinrheumatoidarthritiswheredowestandascopingreviewandmetaanalysis AT murkjeanluc infectionsinbiologicalandtargetedsyntheticdruguseinrheumatoidarthritiswheredowestandascopingreviewandmetaanalysis AT devriesesther infectionsinbiologicalandtargetedsyntheticdruguseinrheumatoidarthritiswheredowestandascopingreviewandmetaanalysis |