Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 470

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The comparative efficacy and toxicity of second‐line drugs in rheumatoid arthritis results of two metaanalyses

Felson, David T., Anderson, Jennifer J., Meenan, Robert F.·1990·Arthritis & Rheumatism

Abstract

We performed 2 metaanalyses of placebo‐controlled and comparative clinical trials to examine the relative efficacy and toxicity of methotrexate (MTX), injectable gold, D‐penicillamine (DP), sulfasalazine (SSZ), auranofin (AUR), and antimalarial drugs, the second‐line drugs most commonly used to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA). For the efficacy study, we applied a set of inclusion criteria and focused on trials which provided information on tender joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, or grip strength. We found 66 clinical trials that contained 117 treatment groups of interest, and for each drug, we combined the treatment groups. For each outcome, results showed that AUR tended to be weaker than other second‐line drugs. The results of the 3 outcome measures were synthesized into a composite measure of outcomes, and AUR was significantly weaker than MTX (P = 0.006), injectable gold (P < 0.0001), DP (P < 0.0001), and SSZ (P = 0.009) and was slightly, but not significantly, weaker than antimalarial agents (P = 0.11). We also found heterogeneity among antimalarial agents, in that patients treated with chloroquine did better than those treated with hydroxychloroquine. We found little difference in efficacy between MTX, injectable gold, DP, and SSZ. A power analysis showed that a trial should contain at least 170 patients per treatment group to successfully differentiate between more effective and less effective (e.g., AUR) second‐line drugs. None of the reported interdrug comparative trials we reviewed were this large. For the toxicity study, our inclusion criteria captured RA trials which reported the proportion of patients who discontinued therapy because of drug toxicity and the total proportion who dropped out. We found 71 clinical trials that contained 129 treatment groups. The average proportion who dropped out and the average proportion who dropped out because of drug toxicity were computed for each drug. Overall, 30.2% of the patients in these trials dropped out; 50% of them did so because of drug toxicity. Injectable gold had higher toxicity rates (P < 0.05) and higher total dropout rates (P < 0.01) than any other drug; 30% of goldtreated patients dropped out because of side effects versus 15% of all trial patients. Antimalarial drugs and AUR had relatively low rates of toxicity; the rate for MTX was imprecise because of discrepancies between trials. Thus, of the commonly used second‐line drugs, AUR is the weakest, and injectable gold is the most toxic. Agents introduced in the future will be compared with these drugs. If a curative drug is not found, large multicenter trials or data synthesis from multiple drug trials may be necessary to identify new treatment regimens that have promise.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/art.1780331001

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 470

Metadata

Authors
Felson, D. T., Anderson, J. J., & Meenan, R. F.
Venue
Arthritis & Rheumatism
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1990-10
Volume
33
Issue
10
Pages
1449-1461
ISSN
  • 0004-3591 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-0131
OpenAlex
W2006549880
Cited by
470
References
1
FWCI
16.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The comparative efficacy and toxicity of second‐line drugs in rheumatoid arthritis results of two metaanalyses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/art.1780331001
The paper
Felson, D. T., Anderson, J. J., & Meenan, R. F. (1990). The comparative efficacy and toxicity of second‐line drugs in rheumatoid arthritis results of two metaanalyses. Arthritis & Rheumatism. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.1780331001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.