↓ Skip to main content

Baricitinib and tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results of regular clinical practice.

Overview of attention for article published in Farmacia Hospitalaria, June 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 368)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Baricitinib and tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results of regular clinical practice.
Published in
Farmacia Hospitalaria, June 2021
DOI 10.7399/fh.11586
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lara González-Freire, Rosa María Giménez-Candela, Susana Castro-Luaces, Ana Belén Veiga-Villaverde, Carlos Crespo-Diz

Abstract

Main objective: Describe the effectiveness and safety of baricitinib and tofacitinib in patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis in our hospital. Analyse whether there are  differences between the two drugs in routine clinical practice. Two-year retrospective study of patients diagnosed with  rheumatoid arthritis treated in our hospital with baricitinib and tofacitinib  for at least 6 months. Databases: Electronic medical record and outpatient medication dispensing software. Variables collected:  Demographic variables, poor prognosis factors, previous treatment,  duration of treatment, concomitant treatment, DAS28, number of swollen  and painful joints, pain visual analogy scale, treatment discontinuation,  and adverse reactions. Effectiveness evaluation: Decreases in the DAS28  scale, the number of swollen and painful joints, and the pain Visual  Analogy Scale at 6 months and 12 months after starting treatment. Safety evaluation: Detection of adverse reactions. Student t- test. A total of 44 patients were evaluated. Of these, 20 (70%  women) received treatment with baricitinib and 24 (95.8% women)  received tofacitinib. Baricitinib reduced the DAS28 by 2.3 and 1.7 at 6  months and 12 months, respectively, and tofacitinib reduced the scale by 2 and 1.9 at 6 months and 12 months, respectively. Baricitinib reduced the  number of swollen and painful joints by 7 at both 6 months and 12  months, and tofacitinib reduced the number of swollen and painful joints  by 4 and 6 at 6 months and 12 months, respectively. Baricitinib reduced  the Visual Analogy Scale score by 7.8 and 6.8 at 6 months and 12 months, respectively, and tofacitinib reduced the score by 5 and 6 at 6 months and 12 months, respectively. Corticosteroid treatment was needed in 40% of patients treated with baricitinib and 62.5% of patients treated with  rofacitinib. Treatment was discontinued due to loss of effectiveness in 10% of patients receiving baricitinib and 25% of patients treated with  tofacitinib. Adverse reactions were experienced by 10% of patients treated with baricitinib and 12.5% of patients treated with tofacitinib. Adverse  reactions led to treatment discontinuation in only 1 patient in each group.  No statistically significant differences were observed between the two  drugs. The results show that baricitinib and tofacitinib were  effective and safe in relation to all the variables analysed. Moreover, both drugs were similar in terms of effectiveness and safety for the  treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in real-world clinical practice.

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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 7 33%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 6 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 7 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Unknown 6 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 03 September 2021.
All research outputs
#3,713,122
of 25,392,582 outputs
Outputs from Farmacia Hospitalaria
#22
of 368 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,172
of 459,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Farmacia Hospitalaria
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,582 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 368 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
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 459,810 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.