scholarly journals Treatment Patterns and Pharmacoutilization in Patients Affected by Rheumatoid Arthritis in Italian Settings

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. 5679
Author(s):  
Valentina Perrone ◽  
Serena Losi ◽  
Veronica Rogai ◽  
Silvia Antonelli ◽  
Walid Fakhouri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Administrative Databases ◽  
First Line ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Synthetic Dmards

This study aimed to evaluate the treatment patterns and pharmacoutilization of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in real-world settings in Italy. This retrospective observational analysis was based on administrative databases of selected Italian entities. All adult patients with RA diagnosis confirmed by ≥1 discharge diagnosis of RA (ICD-9-CM code = 714.0) or an active exemption code (006.714.0) were enrolled in 2019. Two cohorts were created: one included patients prescribed baricitinib, the other those prescribed biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). Overall, 47,711 RA patients were identified, most of them without DMARD prescription. As a first-line prescription, 43.2% of patients were prescribed conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs), 5.2% bDMARDs and 0.3% baricitinib. In 2019, 82.6% of csDMARD users continued with the same DMARD category, 15.9% had a bDMARD, while 1.5% had baricitinib as second-line therapy. Overall, 445 patients used baricitinib during 2019. During follow-up, baricitinib was prescribed as monotherapy to 31% of patients, as cotreatment with csDMARDs and corticosteroids to 27% of patients, with corticosteroids to 28% of patients and with csDMARDs to 14% of patients. In line with previous findings, a trend of bDMARD undertreatment was observed. The treatment patterns of baricitinib patients could help to better characterize patients eligible for new therapeutic options that will be available in the future.

scholarly journals Real-World Treatment Patterns and Outcomes Among Patients with Hairy Cell Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 2125-2125
Author(s):  
Sudeep Karve ◽  
Victoria Divino ◽  
Andrew Gaughan ◽  
Mitch DeKoven ◽  
Guozhi Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Plan ◽  
Real World ◽  
Index Date ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Background and Objective : Hairy cell leukemia (HCL) is a rare condition and accounts for ~2% of all leukemia cases in the US. NCCN guidelines recommend first-line agents including pentostatin and cladribine among patients with HCL. However, a paucity of data exists with regard to real-world treatment patterns among patients with HCL. Current study evaluates treatment patterns and associated clinical outcomes among patients with HCL using a large US administrative claims database. Methods : This retrospective observational study was conducted using the IMS Health PharMetrics Plus Health Plan Claims Database (2006-2014), which includes over 150 million unique health plan members across the US and is nationally representative of the commercially-insured US population. Data includes date stamped medical and pharmacy records along with information on health plan enrollment. Individuals with at least 2 medical claims with a diagnosis for HCL (identified using ICD-9-CM cod: 202.4x) were selected and the first observed claim defined the "index date." Patients <18 years of age at index date or with other malignancies during 6 months (the "pre-index period") prior to index date were excluded. Patients were required at least 90 days of continuous enrollment (the variable "follow-up period") in the health plan post index date with exception of patients who died within 3 months of diagnosis. Patients were followed until death (recorded on inpatient discharge disposition), end of enrollment or end of database, whichever occurred earlier. Study measures including patient demographic and baseline clinical characteristics, line of therapy (LOT), treatment patterns, relapse (receipt of same or new regimen in subsequent LOT following a gap of 365 days) and refractory disease (receipt of same or new regimen where the gap of two adjacent LOTs was <365 days) and post-treatment complications were assessed during the follow-up period. All analyses were descriptive in nature. Results : The study cohort included 749 patients after applying the selection criteria (mean follow-up from diagnosis 32 months). At diagnosis, the mean age (standard deviation) of the study cohort was 56 (10) years and majority of patients were male (77%). Mean baseline comorbidity burden (assessed using Charlson Comorbidity Index score) was 0.8 (1.1) with hypertension (24%) and aplastic anemia (22%) being the two most common co-morbidities. Only 38% (n=282) of patients received first-line chemotherapy post diagnosis. Majority initiated first-line cladribine (76%) as a single agent, while 9% had evidence of single agent pentostatin. Mean time to initiation of first-line therapy from diagnosis was 132 (294) days and average time on first-line therapy was 34 (104) days. Among patients with first-line therapy 14% received second-line therapy and rituximab (53%) and cladribine (21%) were frequently observed second-line agents. Post first-line therapy, mean time to initiation of second-line therapy was 303 (406) days. Among second-line initiators, 76% had refractory disease and 24% had relapsed following first-line. Neutropenia and fever were frequently reported complications while on chemotherapy. Conclusion : The real-world chemotherapy utilization patterns observed in this study are consistent with the NCCN guidelines with cladribine and pentostatin being the agents of choice for first-line therapy. Following diagnosis, more than one-third of patients initiated chemotherapy and only a small proportion of these received second-line chemotherapy suggesting durable response with first-line therapy. Limited follow-up post first-line therapy may have impacted the proportion of patients initiating second-line therapy as well as categorization of refractory and relapse disease. Disclosures Karve: AstraZeneca: Employment. Divino:IMS Health: Employment, Other: IMS Health received funding from AstraZeneca for this study. Gaughan:AstraZeneca: Employment. DeKoven:IMS Health: Employment, Other: IMS Health received funding from AstraZeneca for this study. Gao:MedImmune: Employment. Lanasa:MedImmune: Employment.

scholarly journals Conventional Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon Hill ◽  
Nina Frey
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Kinase Inhibitors ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
First Line ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Disease Modifying ◽  
Evidence Based Guidelines

Nine evidence-based guidelines were identified that recommend the use of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs as a first-line therapy for patients with rheumatoid arthritis prior to using biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or Janus kinase inhibitors. Methotrexate monotherapy was the most commonly recommended conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug recommended as first-line therapy by the included guidelines. Eight of the included guidelines recommend combination therapy using multiple conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs if monotherapy is ineffective and 4 included guidelines recommend the use of glucocorticoids in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

scholarly journals Rheumatoid arthritis: problems of treatment at the present stage

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 65-70
Author(s):  
N. V. Chichasova
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Biologic Agents ◽  
Control Treatment ◽  
Treat To Target ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Synthetic Dmards ◽  
Disease Modifying ◽  
Set Up

The possibilities of rheumatoid arthritis therapy have been significantly expanded today. In addition to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), biologic agents (BAs), and a targeted synthetic DMARD, a control treatment strategy has been put into practice.The paper demonstrates successes in the early prescription of csDMARD and the implementation of treat-to-target principles – to achieve the goal after 6 months in 50% of patients receiving subcutaneous methotrexate and 45% of those using a Leflunomide generic. During this therapy, there is a lower need for BAs and targeted synthetic DMARDs. The priority problem is to train general practitioners in methods for the early detection of RA and to set up schools for these patients.

Characteristics, treatment patterns, and economic burden of patients with metastatic cervical cancer receiving systemic anticancer therapy.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 51-51
Author(s):  
Xiaoyun Pan ◽  
Lincy S. Lal ◽  
John White ◽  
Seyed Hamidreza Mahmoudpour ◽  
Christian Valencia
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Economic Burden ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Duration Of Treatment ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Line Therapy

51 Background: In 2021, 14,480 patients are estimated to be diagnosed with cervical cancer in the US; 16% of patients are expected to have metastatic disease for whom the 5-year survival rate is 17.6% per SEER estimates. Patients with metastatic cervical cancer (mCC) are treated mainly with systemic therapy. This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics, demographics, treatment patterns, and economic burden of patients with mCC receiving systemic therapy. Methods: Eligible women had been diagnosed with cervical cancer, as evidenced by >2 outpatient or >1 inpatient claim in the Optum Research Database from January 2014 through January 2020. Patients were included if they had metastasis within 6 months before or after cervical cancer diagnosis, with evidence of systemic treatment on or after the latter of a claim date for cervical cancer disease or metastatic disease. The index date was the first-line treatment initiation date. Patients were required to have ≥6 months of pre-index continuous enrollment. The top 3 treatment regimens and median treatment duration by line of therapy were described. All-cause per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs (2019 US dollars), including plan and patient paid amounts, were reported for full follow-up period from first-line and second-line therapy initiation. Results: The study sample consisted of 778 patients (mean age, 59 years; commercial, 58%; Medicare Advantage, 42%). The mean (median) follow-up period was 14 (9) months. Top baseline comorbidities were diseases of the urinary system (71%) and diseases of the female genital organs (70%), and the median Charlson comorbidity index was 7. In the first line, 80% of patients received platinum-based therapy and 23% received bevacizumab (bev). Of 778 patients, only 294 (38%) received second-line therapy, with 34% receiving bev. Top first-line treatment regimens were carboplatin + paclitaxel (27%), cisplatin (21%), and bev + carboplatin + paclitaxel (10%); the median (95% CI) duration of treatment was 3.4 (3.1-3.7) months. Top second-line treatment regimens were bev + carboplatin + paclitaxel (13%), carboplatin + paclitaxel (11%), and pembrolizumab (6%); the median duration of treatment was 3.8 (3.1-4.2) months. Mean all-cause total PPPM costs were $19,519 from first-line and $22,660 second-line therapy initiation (table). Conclusions: This study indicates that real-world mCC patients have short treatment durations and significant economic burden with first-line and second-line therapy. Novel therapies associated with greater clinical benefits in patients with mCC may provide economic benefit.[Table: see text]

Periodontitis Severity Affects the Clinical Response to Biological Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A 1-Year Follow-up Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tetsuo Kobayashi ◽  
Satoshi Ito ◽  
Akira Murasawa ◽  
Hajime Ishikawa ◽  
Koichi Tabeta
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Clinical Response ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Case Definitions ◽  
Synthetic Dmards ◽  
Disease Modifying

ABSTRACT Objectives To assess whether periodontitis severity affects the clinical response to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for 1 year in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Methods Data were collected from 50 RA patients who had received corticosteroids, conventional synthetic DMARDs, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs before (baseline) and after 1 year of bDMARD therapy in a retrospective study. Rheumatologic conditions were compared between the two periodontitis severity groups according to the periodontal inflamed surface area (PISA) or Centers for Disease Control Prevention (CDC)/ American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) case definitions Results Twenty-eight patients with no or mild periodontitis showed significantly greater decreases in changes in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and tender and swollen joint count in comparison to 22 patients with moderate and severe periodontitis (p = 0.02, p = 0.01, and p = 0.03). Both bivariate and multivariate analyses revealed a significantly positive association between the baseline CDC/AAP definitions and CDAI changes (p = 0.005 and p = 0.0038). However, rheumatologic conditions were comparable between 25 patients each in the low and high PISA groups. Conclusions Baseline periodontitis severity according to the CDC/AAP definitions is associated with the clinical response to bDMARDs for 1 year in RA patients.

scholarly journals Use of healthcare resources in a cohort of rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tofacitinib

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge Enrique Machado-Alba ◽  
Manuel E. Machado-Duque ◽  
Andres Gaviria-Mendoza ◽  
Juan Manuel Reyes ◽  
Natalia Castaño Gamboa
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Pharmacological Treatment ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Cost Of Care ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Healthcare Resources ◽  
Conventional Dmards ◽  
Disease Modifying

Abstract Introduction/objectives The objective of this study is to describe the treatment patterns and use of healthcare resources in a cohort of Colombian patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) or tofacitinib. Method This is a descriptive study from a retrospective cohort of patients diagnosed with RA who were treated with bDMARDs or tofacitinib after failure of conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) or first bDMARD. Patients who were receiving pharmacological treatment between 01 January 2014 and 30 June 2018 were included. The analysis is through the revision of claim database and electronical medical records. Demographic and clinical data were collected. The costs of healthcare resources were estimated from the billing expense of healthcare service provider. Results We evaluated 588 RA patients on treatment with bDMARDs (n = 505) or tofacitinib (n = 83), most of them were in combination with cDMARDs (85.4%). The 88.1% were females and mean age was 57.3 ± 12.5 years. The median evolution of RA since diagnosis was 9 years (IQR:4–17.2). The mean duration of use during follow-up of the bDMARDs or tofacitinib was similar, with a mean of 9.8 ± 1.9 months. It was identified that 394 (67.0%) discontinued therapy. The average annual direct cost of care per patient was USD 8997 ± 2172, where 97.2% was due to drug costs. The average annual cost of treatment per patient with bDMARDs was USD 8604 and tofacitinib was USD 6377. Conclusions In the face of a first failure of cDMARD, bDMARDs are frequently added. A high frequency of patients do not persist treatment during the first year of follow-up. The pharmacological treatment is the most representative cause of healthcare costs. Key Points• Rheumatoid arthritis is a disease with a high burden of comorbidities, complications, and worse health-related quality of life and is associated with elevated healthcare costs.• The biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tofacitinib medications are indicated for those with significant progression of the disease and when there is a need for alternatives to achieve low levels of activity and remission.• Patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tofacitinib represent a significant economic burden to the health system, especially in the costs derived from pharmacological treatment.

Efficacy of Cyclosporine Treatment in Patients with MDS.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 4608-4608
Author(s):  
Alina Kokhno ◽  
Elena Parovitchnikova ◽  
Elena Mikhailova ◽  
Yulia Olshanskaya ◽  
Irina Kaplanskaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Stable Disease ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Bone Marrow Failure ◽  
Normal Karyotype ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) represents a heterogenous group of myeloid neoplasms characterized by abnormal differentiation and maturation of myeloid cells, bone marrow failure and genetic instability. The recent clinical and laboratory investigations suggest that MDS is closely related to diseases in which the bone marrow failure is mediated at least in part by the immune system. The are few studies concerning the of efficacy of treatment of MDS pts with cyclosporine A (CSA) but they are limited to the group of pts with bone marrow hypoplasia. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of CSA treatment in MDS pts as first line or second line therapy. 48 pts with different forms of MDS were included in study. The group of first line CSA treatment included 30 pts, male-18/female-12, RA-3, RARS-1, RCMD-18, RAEB-7, RAEBt-1, 20-normal karyotype, 10-different abberations including: 5q−, 16q+, −7, 12q+, −Y, [11p+,7q−] and complex abb. Hypoplastic bone marrow was revealed in 15 pts, hyperplastic-8 pts, hypo/hyper-7 pts. Second line therapy group included 18 pts, male-9/female-9, RCMD-11, RARS-1, RAEB-5, RAEBt-1, normal karyotype-3, cytogenetic anomalies-13 (+8, 5q−,−7, +8 and complex abb.). Hypoplastic bone marrow was revealed in 12 pts, hyperplastic-4 pts, hypo/hyper-4 pts. The first line therapy consited of splenectomy in 8 pts, low doses of Ara-C-3, interferon-α-3, chemotherapy-2 and ATG-2 pts. CSA was applied at 5–10 mg/kg/day initially and then adjusted according to blood levels and toxicity. The maintenance dose was 1–3 mg/kg/day. Minimum time to response evaluation was one month. Complete response (CR) was defined as normal PB counts, BM aspirate; partial response-improvement of PB counts to 50% of normal and freedom from transfusions; stabilization-decrease of transfusion requirements and stabilization of PB counts for more then 1 month. Total response rate in first group was 60% (18 pts) with median follow up of 10 months (2–134). CR was estimated in 20% (6pts), median follow-up 72 months (44–134). 2 pts with CR are in clonal remission. 2 pts from response group developed acute leukemia (AL). 40% of pts showed no response.58% of pts without response developed RAEB or AL. 42% of pts were in stable disease and were treated with another modalities. The response rate in second group was 61% (11 pts) with median follow-up of 7 months (1–78). 22% (4 pts) achieved CR, median follow-up 60 months (43–78). 39% of pts showed no response. 71% from these pts (5) transformed to RAEB or AL. 2 pts remained in stable disease. In both groups response was registrated from 1 to 4 months from treatment initiation (median 3 months). CR was achieved in the majority of pts after 1 year of treatment. Response was achieved in 77% of pts with hypo/hyper and hypoplastic bone marrow and in 12% of pts with hyperplastic bone marrow. Overall survival was decreased in pts with more the 5% blasts in bone marrow (p=0,02 for 1st line group, p=0,075 for 2nd line group), and increased for pts with hypo and hypo/hyper bone marrow cellularity (p=0,002 for 1st line group). There was no impact of cytogenetics. We may conclude, that CSA demonstrates good efficacy in therapy of MDS pts, especially for pts with RA, RARS and RCMD with hypo and hypo/hypercellular bone marrow and reactive lymphoid nodules in bone marrow. It can be initiated as 1st or 2nd line therapy and should be continued at least for 3 months before evaluating of response.

Outcomes in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) who discontinued (DC) first-line nivolumab + ipilimumab (N+I) or sunitinib (S) due to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) in CheckMate 214.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 581-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nizar M. Tannir ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Elizabeth R. Plimack ◽  
David F. McDermott ◽  
Philippe Barthelemy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Groups ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Study Dose ◽  
Clinical Trial Information

581 Background: The phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial demonstrated superior efficacy for N+I vs S in aRCC, although more patients discontinued N+I compared with S due to TRAEs. This is a post hoc analysis of outcomes in pts who DC N+I or S due to TRAEs. Methods: Untreated pts with clear cell aRCC were randomized 1:1 to N 3 mg/kg + I 1 mg/kg Q3Wx4 (induction) and then N 3 mg/kg Q3W (maintenance), or S 50 mg daily for 4 wk on, 2 wk off (6-wk cycles). This analysis includes all pts who DC due to TRAEs reported during extended follow-up (≤100 d after last study dose). Results: Of 550 N+I randomized pts, 135 (25%) DC due to TRAEs, most commonly increased ALT, diarrhea, and increased AST (all 3%); 64 (12%) of 535 S randomized pts DC due to TRAEs, most commonly increased ALT, diarrhea, and pancreatitis (all 1%). In N+I pts who DC due to TRAEs, 47% DC during N+I induction, 7% completed induction but no N maintenance, and 46% completed induction and received N maintenance (median [range] 8 [1–47] doses). At 30-mo minimum follow-up, ORR per investigator, CR rate, and 24-mo OS rate were higher in pts who DC N+I vs S due to TRAEs. Outcomes in pts who DC S due to TRAEs were similar to those in all S ITT pts and worse than in N+I pts who DC due to TRAEs (Table). At 24 mo, 42% of pts who DC N+I due to TRAEs were alive and free from second-line therapy. Consistent outcomes were seen in pts who DC N+I due to TRAEs across IMDC risk groups (data to be presented). Pts who DC N+I due to TRAEs experienced more immune-related select TRAEs and received more high-dose steroids (≥40 mg prednisone daily or equiv.), but times to onset and resolution and resolution rates of select TRAEs were similar vs all treated N+I pts. Conclusions: Discontinuation of first-line N+I due to TRAEs did not result in impaired outcomes, and a high proportion of pts remain alive and free from second-line therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT02231749. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Efficacy of glucocorticoids, conventional and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a systematic literature review informing the 2016 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (6) ◽  
pp. 1102-1107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katerina Chatzidionysiou ◽  
Sharzad Emamikia ◽  
Jackie Nam ◽  
Sofia Ramiro ◽  
Josef Smolen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Treat To Target ◽  
Tight Control ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Eular Recommendations ◽  
Synthetic Dmards ◽  
Disease Modifying

ObjectivesTo perform a systematic literature review (SLR) informing the 2016 update of the recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsAn SLR for the period between 2013 and 2016 was undertaken to assess the efficacy of glucocorticoids (GCs), conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) (tofacitinib and baricitinib) in randomised clinical trials.ResultsFor GCs, four studies were included in the SLR. Patients without poor prognostic factors experienced benefit when GCs were added to methotrexate (MTX). Lower doses of GCs were similar to higher doses. For csDMARDs, two new studies comparing MTX monotherapy with combination csDMARD were included in the SLR. In the tREACH trial at the end of 12 months no difference between the groups in disease activity, functional ability and radiographic progression was seen, using principles of tight control (treat-to-target). In the CareRA trial, combination therapy with csDMARDs was not superior to MTX monotherapy and monotherapy was better tolerated.For tsDMARDs, tofacitinib and baricitinib were shown to be more effective than placebo (MTX) in different patient populations.ConclusionsAddition of GCs to csDMARD therapy may be beneficial but the benefits should be balanced against the risk of toxicity. Under tight control conditions MTX monotherapy is not less effective than combination csDMARDs, but better tolerated. Tofacitinib and baricitinib are efficacious in patients with RA, including those with refractory disease.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document