Cargando…
Treatment Comparison in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Head-to-Head Trials and Innovative Study Designs
Over the last decades, the increasing knowledge in the area of rheumatoid arthritis has progressively expanded the arsenal of available drugs, especially with the introduction of novel targeted therapies such as biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In this situation, rheumatolo...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4009266/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24839607 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/831603 |
_version_ | 1782479739029553152 |
---|---|
author | Favalli, Ennio Giulio Bugatti, Serena Biggioggero, Martina Caporali, Roberto |
author_facet | Favalli, Ennio Giulio Bugatti, Serena Biggioggero, Martina Caporali, Roberto |
author_sort | Favalli, Ennio Giulio |
collection | PubMed |
description | Over the last decades, the increasing knowledge in the area of rheumatoid arthritis has progressively expanded the arsenal of available drugs, especially with the introduction of novel targeted therapies such as biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In this situation, rheumatologists are offered a wide range of treatment options, but on the other side the need for comparisons between available drugs becomes more and more crucial in order to better define the strategies for the choice and the optimal sequencing. Indirect comparisons or meta-analyses of data coming from different randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are not immune to conceptual and technical challenges and often provide inconsistent results. In this review we examine some of the possible evolutions of traditional RCTs, such as the inclusion of active comparators, aimed at individualising treatments in real-life conditions. Although head-to-head RCTs may be considered the best tool to directly compare the efficacy and safety of two different DMARDs, surprisingly only 20 studies with such design have been published in the last 25 years. Given the recent advent of the first RCTs truly comparing biological DMARDs, we also review the state of the art of head-to-head trials in RA. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4009266 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-40092662014-05-18 Treatment Comparison in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Head-to-Head Trials and Innovative Study Designs Favalli, Ennio Giulio Bugatti, Serena Biggioggero, Martina Caporali, Roberto Biomed Res Int Review Article Over the last decades, the increasing knowledge in the area of rheumatoid arthritis has progressively expanded the arsenal of available drugs, especially with the introduction of novel targeted therapies such as biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In this situation, rheumatologists are offered a wide range of treatment options, but on the other side the need for comparisons between available drugs becomes more and more crucial in order to better define the strategies for the choice and the optimal sequencing. Indirect comparisons or meta-analyses of data coming from different randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are not immune to conceptual and technical challenges and often provide inconsistent results. In this review we examine some of the possible evolutions of traditional RCTs, such as the inclusion of active comparators, aimed at individualising treatments in real-life conditions. Although head-to-head RCTs may be considered the best tool to directly compare the efficacy and safety of two different DMARDs, surprisingly only 20 studies with such design have been published in the last 25 years. Given the recent advent of the first RCTs truly comparing biological DMARDs, we also review the state of the art of head-to-head trials in RA. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2014 2014-04-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4009266/ /pubmed/24839607 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/831603 Text en Copyright © 2014 Ennio Giulio Favalli et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Article Favalli, Ennio Giulio Bugatti, Serena Biggioggero, Martina Caporali, Roberto Treatment Comparison in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Head-to-Head Trials and Innovative Study Designs |
title | Treatment Comparison in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Head-to-Head Trials and Innovative Study Designs |
title_full | Treatment Comparison in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Head-to-Head Trials and Innovative Study Designs |
title_fullStr | Treatment Comparison in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Head-to-Head Trials and Innovative Study Designs |
title_full_unstemmed | Treatment Comparison in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Head-to-Head Trials and Innovative Study Designs |
title_short | Treatment Comparison in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Head-to-Head Trials and Innovative Study Designs |
title_sort | treatment comparison in rheumatoid arthritis: head-to-head trials and innovative study designs |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4009266/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24839607 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/831603 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT favallienniogiulio treatmentcomparisoninrheumatoidarthritisheadtoheadtrialsandinnovativestudydesigns AT bugattiserena treatmentcomparisoninrheumatoidarthritisheadtoheadtrialsandinnovativestudydesigns AT biggioggeromartina treatmentcomparisoninrheumatoidarthritisheadtoheadtrialsandinnovativestudydesigns AT caporaliroberto treatmentcomparisoninrheumatoidarthritisheadtoheadtrialsandinnovativestudydesigns |