↓ Skip to main content

Does addition of glucocorticoids to the initial therapy influence the later course of the disease in patients with early RA? Results from the Swiss prospective observational registry (SCQM)

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Rheumatology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Does addition of glucocorticoids to the initial therapy influence the later course of the disease in patients with early RA? Results from the Swiss prospective observational registry (SCQM)
Published in
Clinical Rheumatology, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10067-016-3468-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ruediger B. Mueller, Nazim Reshiti, Toni Kaegi, Axel Finckh, Sarah R. Haile, Hendrik Schulze-Koops, Michael Schiff, Michael Spaeth, Johannes von Kempis, on behalf of the SCQM physicians

Abstract

The main goal of this study was to analyse whether initial addition of glucocorticoid to DMARD therapy influences the long-term course of the disease in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. All patients from the Swiss RA cohort SCQM with recent-onset arthritis (disease duration ≤1 year) were analysed. The exposure of interest was the use of glucocorticoids (GCs) at baseline. As primary outcome, we considered clinical and radiographic disease progression, assessed by the disease activity (disease activity score, DAS-28), function (health assessment questionnaire disability index, HAQ-DI) and structural joint damage (Ratingen erosion score). The baseline disease characteristics were compared using standard descriptive statistics. The effects of initial GC use on disease progression during follow-up were estimated using linear mixed models with random slope and random intercept, adjusted for potential confounders. In total, 592 patients with early disease were available, with 4.3 years of follow-up (average). Of these, 363 were initially treated with glucocorticoids (GC patients) and 228 were not (no-GC patients). DAS-28 (4.6 vs. 4.3, p = 0.01) and the HAQ-DI (0.94 vs. 0.82, p = 0.01) were higher at baseline in GC patients, while other prognostic factors were balanced at baseline. Neither the change of DAS-28, of HAQ-DI nor of the development of joint erosions differed between the two groups during follow-up. Escalation of treatment employing biologics was documented in 18.0% of the no-GC patients and 27.3% of the GC patients (p < 0.01). In this cohort, patients with early RA initially treated with GCs had higher measures of disease activity at baseline in comparison to no-GC patients. Despite a similar course of the disease in GC versus non-GC patients, the higher escalation rate to biologic agents in GC patients may reflect a disease less responsive to therapy in these patients. These data suggest that GC use as part of the initial therapeutic strategy in early RA may prevent a more severe course of the disease in patients with higher clinical disease measures at the start of therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 48 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 17 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 18 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,382,391
of 22,931,367 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Rheumatology
#2,658
of 3,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,912
of 309,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Rheumatology
#35
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,931,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,033 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,827 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.