Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 448

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparison of Treatment Strategies in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Randomized Trial

Goekoop-Ruiterman, Yvonne P.M., de Vries-Bouwstra, Jeska K., Allaart, Cornelia F., van Zeben, Derkjen, Kerstens, Pit J.S.M., Hazes, J. Mieke W., Zwinderman, Aelko H., Peeters, André J., de Jonge-Bok, Johanna M., Mallée, Constant, de Beus, Wim M., de Sonnaville, Peter B.J., Ewals, Jacques A.P.M., Breedveld, Ferdinand C., Dijkmans, Ben A.C.·2007·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In patients with early rheumatoid arthritis, initial combination therapies provide earlier clinical improvement and less progression of joint damage after 1 year compared with initial monotherapies (as demonstrated in the BeSt study). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the initial clinical and radiographic efficacy of combination therapies could be maintained during the second year of follow-up in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled clinical trial with blinded assessors. SETTING: 18 peripheral and 2 university medical centers in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: 508 patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis. INTERVENTION: Sequential monotherapy (group 1), step-up combination therapy (group 2), initial combination therapy with tapered high-dose prednisone (group 3), or initial combination therapy with infliximab (group 4). Trimonthly treatment adjustments were made to achieve low disease activity. MEASUREMENTS: Primary end points were functional ability (Health Assessment Questionnaire) and Sharp-van der Heijde score for radiographic joint damage. RESULTS: Groups 3 and 4 had more rapid clinical improvement during the first year; all groups improved further to a mean functional ability score of 0.6 (overall, P = 0.257) and 42% were in remission (overall, P = 0.690) during the second year. Progression of joint damage remained better suppressed in groups 3 and 4 (median scores of 2.0, 2.0, 1.0, and 1.0 in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively [P = 0.004]). After 2 years, 33%, 31%, 36%, and 53% of patients in groups 1 through 4, respectively, were receiving single-drug therapy for initial treatment. There were no significant differences in toxicity. LIMITATIONS: Patients and physicians were aware of the allocated group, and the assessors were blinded. CONCLUSIONS: Currently available antirheumatic drugs can be highly effective in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis in a setting of tight disease control. Initial combination therapies seem to provide earlier clinical improvement and less progression of joint damage, but all treatment strategies eventually showed similar clinical improvements. In addition, combination therapy can be withdrawn successfully and less treatment adjustments are needed than with initial monotherapies.

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 · 10.7326/0003-4819-146-6-200703200-00005

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
Goekoop-Ruiterman, Y. P. M., de Vries-Bouwstra, J. K., Allaart, C. F., van Zeben, D., Kerstens, P. J. S. M., Hazes, J. M. W., Zwinderman, A. H., Peeters, A. J., de Jonge-Bok, J. M., Mallée, C., de Beus, W. M., de Sonnaville, P. B. J., Ewals, J. A. P. M., Breedveld, F. C., & Dijkmans, B. A. C.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
2007-03-20
Volume
146
Issue
6
Pages
406-415
ISSN
  • 0003-4819
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2156712409
Cited by
448
References
0
FWCI
35.37
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.