Back to Authors

Boers, Maarten

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6969-283X

Mayo Clinic

Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Citations 2

A Novel Method to Combine Assessment of Benefit and Harm: Outcome Measures in Rheumatology 3×3 Methodology Applied to Two Active Comparator Trials
Boers, Maarten , Singh, Jasvinder A. , Cofield, Stacey S. , Bridges, S. Louis , Moreland, Larry W. , O’Dell, James R., Wu, Hongsheng, Curtis, Jeffrey R. , Curtis, Jeffrey R , Singh, Jasvinder A , Moreland, Larry W , Leatherman, Sarah M.

Arthritis Care & Research | April 25, 2018 | Volume: 71 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 319-322

10.1002/acr.23590 Get It

ObjectiveThe Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 3×3 method analyzes the occurrence of benefit and harm simultaneously at the individual patient level. We applied this method to 2 recent rheumatoid arthritis (RA) trial data sets.MethodsThe Treatment of Early Aggressive Rheumatoid Arthritis (TEAR) and the Rheumatoid Arthritis Comparison of Active Therapies (RACAT) randomized trial outcomes for safety were defined according to OMERACT as having no adverse events (AEs), non‐serious AEs, and serious AEs. Treatment efficacy was defined as good, moderate, or no response. A good treatment response without any AEs was labeled an unqualified success, and no treatment response but at least 1 AE was considered an unmitigated failure. The association between benefit and harm was assessed by chi‐square or exact tests, as appropriate.ResultsIn TEAR, 612 of 755 patients had response data at 48 weeks: 14% of patients experienced unqualified success and 9% had unmitigated failure, with no difference between the treatment arms. Treatment response and AE rates were not correlated. In RACAT, 309 of 353 patients had response data at 48 weeks: 6% of patients experienced unqualified success and 11% had unmitigated failure, with no differences between the treatment arms. Response and AE rates were negatively correlated. The frequency of AEs and serious AEs increased as response decreased (P = 0.008).ConclusionWe found some evidence that clinical response may be reduced by the co‐occurrence of AEs.
“Official View” on Glucocorticoids in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review of International Guidelines and Consensus Statements
Palmowski, Yannick , Buttgereit, Thomas , Dejaco, Christian , Matteson, Eric L. , Voshaar, Marieke , Boers, Maarten , Buttgereit, Frank , Bijlsma, J. W. J. , Dejaco, Christian , Buttgereit, Frank

Arthritis Care & Research | December 28, 2016 | Volume: 69 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1134-1141

10.1002/acr.23185 Get It

ObjectiveTo describe the perception of the current role of systemic glucocorticoids in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by examining their importance and the current level of evidence in recent guidelines, and to identify open questions to be addressed in future guidelines and research projects.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review using the databases Ovid Embase, PubMed Medline, and Cochrane Library for guidelines on the pharmacologic treatment of RA. Retrieved articles were evaluated regarding their quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool and scrutinized for all relevant information concerning the use of glucocorticoids.ResultsAll guidelines agree that glucocorticoids, especially if given at low doses and for a short duration, are an appropriate option in the treatment of RA. However, many recommendations remain vague, as reliable and detailed evidence is scarce. Important aspects of glucocorticoid therapy are partially or completely neglected, and the existing nomenclature is not used uniformly. Quality evaluation revealed flaws in many articles, concerning not only glucocorticoid‐specific recommendations but also guideline quality in general.ConclusionCurrent recommendations for use of glucocorticoids in the management of RA are suboptimal. More rigorous evaluation of doses, timing, and duration of their use is needed. Existing nomenclature on glucocorticoid therapy should be used uniformly.