Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 751

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Rates of serious infection, including site‐specific and bacterial intracellular infection, in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving anti–tumor necrosis factor therapy: Results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register

Dixon, W. G., Watson, K., Lunt, M., Hyrich, K. L., Silman, A. J., Symmons, D. P. M.·2006·Arthritis & Rheumatism

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether the rate of serious infection is higher in anti–tumor necrosis factor (anti‐TNF)–treated rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients compared with RA patients treated with traditional disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Methods: This was a national prospective observational study of 7,664 anti‐TNF–treated and 1,354 DMARD‐treated patients with severe RA from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register. All serious infections, stratified by site and organism, were included in the analysis. Results: Between December 2001 and September 2005, there were 525 serious infections in the anti‐TNF–treated cohort and 56 in the comparison cohort (9,868 and 1,352 person‐years of followup, respectively). The incidence rate ratio (IRR), adjusted for baseline risk, for the anti‐TNF–treated cohort compared with the comparison cohort was 1.03 (95% confidence interval 0.68–1.57). However, the frequency of serious skin and soft tissue infections was increased in anti‐TNF–treated patients, with an adjusted IRR of 4.28 (95% confidence interval 1.06–17.17). There was no difference in infection risk between the 3 main anti‐TNF drugs. Nineteen serious bacterial intracellular infections occurred, exclusively in patients in the anti‐TNF–treated cohort. Conclusion: In patients with active RA, anti‐TNF therapy was not associated with increased risk of overall serious infection compared with DMARD treatment, after adjustment for baseline risk. In contrast, the rate of serious skin and soft tissue infections was increased, suggesting an important physiologic role of TNF in host defense in the skin and soft tissues beyond that in other tissues.

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.21978

Cites

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

Metadata

Authors
Dixon, W. G., Watson, K., Lunt, M., Hyrich, K. L., Silman, A. J., & Symmons, D. P. M.
Venue
Arthritis & Rheumatism
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-07-25
Volume
54
Issue
8
Pages
2368-2376
ISSN
  • 0004-3591 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-0131
OpenAlex
W2046549669
Cited by
751
References
0
FWCI
37.86
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

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.