Cited by 112Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesAutoimmune and Inflammatory Disorders ResearchInflammatory mediators and NSAID effects

Cardiovascular Risk in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Comparing TNF-α Blockade with Nonbiologic DMARDs

Open access
Solomon, Daniel H., Curtis, Jeffrey R., Saag, Kenneth G., Lii, Joyce, Chen, Lang, Harrold, Leslie R., Herrinton, Lisa J., Graham, David J. +6 more·2013·The American Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Background Elevated tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α likely contributes to the excess cardiovascular risk observed in rheumatoid arthritis. We compared the cardiovascular risk in rheumatoid arthritis patients starting a TNF-α blocking agent versus a nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (nbDMARD).Methods Subjects with rheumatoid arthritis participating in several different US insurance programs between 1998 and 2007 who received methotrexate were eligible. Those who added a TNF-α blocking agent were compared with subjects who added a nbDMARD in Cox regression models stratified by propensity score decile and adjusted for oral glucocorticoid dosage. We examined the composite cardiovascular end point of myocardial infarction, stroke, or coronary re-vascularization after 6 months.Results We compared 8656 new users of a nbDMARD with 11,587 new users of a TNF-α blocking agent with similar baseline covariates. Incidence rates per 100 person-years for the composite cardiovascular end point were 3.05 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.54-3.65) for nbDMARDs and 2.52 (95% CI, 2.12-2.98) for TNF-α blocking agents. The hazard ratio (HR) for the TNF-α blocking agent compared with nbDMARD carrying the first exposure forward was 0.80 (95%, CI 0.62-1.04), while the HR for the as-treated analysis was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.52-0.97). The potential cardiovascular benefit of TNF-α blocking agents was strongest among individuals ≥65 years of age (HR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.34 -0.77; P for interaction = 0.075).Conclusion Among subjects with rheumatoid arthritis, TNF-α blocking agents may be associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular events compared with an nbDMARD. Randomized controlled clinical trials should be considered to test this hypothesis.

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 · 10.1016/j.amjmed.2013.02.016

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Solomon, D. H., Curtis, J. R., Saag, K. G., Lii, J., Chen, L., Harrold, L. R., Herrinton, L. J., Graham, D. J., Kowal, M. K., Kuriya, B., Liu, L., Griffin, M. R., Lewis, J. D., & Rassen, J. A.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
  • Kaiser Permanente (US)
  • United States Food and Drug Administration (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Solomon, Daniel H.
Venue
The American Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-08
Volume
126
Issue
8
Pages
730.e9-730.e17
ISSN
0002-9343 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1995953874
Cited by
111
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 4
FWCI
11.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Food and Drug Administration
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (1U18 HSO17919-0)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Autoimmune and Inflammatory Disorders Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Inflammatory mediators and NSAID effects
Keywords
rheumatoid arthritis, cardiovascular risk, TNF-alpha blockade, methotrexate, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, cardiovascular events, older adults, propensity score matching
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Humans, Male, Methotrexate, Middle Aged, Myocardial Infarction, Myocardial Revascularization, Retrospective Studies, Risk, Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha, Cohort Studies, Proportional Hazards Models, Treatment Outcome, Antirheumatic Agents, Stroke, Kaplan-Meier Estimate

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