Comparison of conventional immunosuppressive drugs versus anti-TNF-α agents in non-infectious non-anterior uveitis
Journal of Autoimmunity, ISSN: 0896-8411, Vol: 113, Page: 102481
2020
- 15Citations
- 24Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations15
- Citation Indexes15
- 15
- CrossRef4
- Captures24
- Readers24
- 24
Article Description
To compare the efficacy and safety of Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and anti-TNF-α agents in patients with non-infectious non-anterior uveitis. Single center retrospective study including adult patients with non-infectious intermediate, posterior or pan-uveitis. Outcomes were compared between patients treated with DMARDs or anti-TNF-α agents. The primary outcome was treatment failure or occurrence of serious adverse events. Treatment failure was determined by ophthalmologic criteria. Seventy-three patients were included, mostly female (52%). Among them, 39 were treated with DMARDs and 34 with anti-TNF-α agents. The main uveitis causes were idiopathic (30%), birdshot chorio-retinopathy (25%), sarcoidosis (16%) and Behçet's disease (14%). The primary outcome was observed in 56% of patients treated with anti-TNF-α agents versus 59% of patients treated with DMARDs (p = 0.82). Median time to observe the primary outcome was 16 months (anti-TNF-α group) versus 21 months (p = 0.52). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of treatment failure, corticosteroid sparing effect, visual acuity improvement or adverse events. Earlier control of ocular inflammation was achieved with anti-TNF-α agents than with DMARDs (p = 0.006). In relapsing patients, anti-TNF-α agents allowed better corticosteroid sparing (p = 0.06). DMARDs could still be used as first-line therapy for non-infectious non-anterior uveitis after corticosteroid therapy. However, anti-TNF-α agents could be proposed as an alternative in cases of severe inflammation or initial high level of steroid dependency.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896841120300998; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2020.102481; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85086709459&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32586650; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0896841120300998; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2020.102481
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know