Rheumatology Advance Access originally published online on March 9, 2006
Rheumatology 2006 45(6):649-652; doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kel053
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
EDITORIAL |
Updating the British Society for Rheumatology guidelines for anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy in adult rheumatoid arthritis (again)
1 Dept of Rheumatology, Derbyshire Royal Infirmary, Derby, 2 Dept of Rheumatology, Arrowe Park Hospital, Wirral, 3 Rheumatology Dept, St George's Healthcare, NHS Trust, London, 4 Rheumatology Dept, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, 5 Rheumatology Department, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Headington, Oxford, 6 Dept of Rheumatology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich
Correspondence to: C. Deighton. E-mail: chris.deighton@derbyhospitals.nhs.uk
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Because of the significant cost implications of biological treatment, most UK rheumatologists are willing to accept limitations in the use of these drugs. They are, however, aware of the increasing literature on biological treatment and are concerned about the rigid nature of the guidelines. Guidelines cannot be static and must be adjusted according to new information so that they can best meet the needs of our patients. No government is likely to allow unlimited access to anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) drugs for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) unless these drugs suddenly become inexpensive. We have data in abundance for the efficacy and safety of anti-TNF drugs, but ‘cheap’ is not an adjective we will be able to apply to them for the foreseeable future. In the meantime, UK clinicians see patients with active RA in whom their clinical instinct says that anti-TNF therapy is indicated, yet they fail to fulfil the current
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P Emery, R Van Vollenhoven, M Ostergaard, E Choy, B Combe, W Graninger, K Krueger, M Matucci-Cerinic, F Navarro, P van Riel, et al. Guidelines for initiation of anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: similarities and differences across Europe Ann Rheum Dis, April 1, 2009; 68(4): 456 - 459. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. Deighton and K. Hyrich Why do the French get much greater access to anti-TNF than the British? Vive la difference? Pas necessairement Rheumatology, November 1, 2008; 47(11): 1600 - 1602. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M. Pocock, J. C. Vasconcelos, and A. J. K. Ostor Assessment of anti-TNF-{alpha} efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis: is 3 months sufficient? Rheumatology, July 1, 2008; 47(7): 1073 - 1076. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Jerram, S. Butt, K. Gadsby, and C. Deighton Discrepancies between the EULAR response criteria and the NICE guidelines for continuation of anti-TNF therapy in RA: a cause for concern? Rheumatology, February 1, 2008; 47(2): 180 - 182. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Bharadwaj, S. Agrawal, M. Batley, and A. Hammond Use of parenteral methotrexate significantly reduces the need for biological therapy Rheumatology, February 1, 2008; 47(2): 222 - 222. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Smith, K. Gadsby, S. Butt, D. Carruthers, A. Deeming, J. Ledingham, M. Fletcher, D. Mulherin, S. Roskell, L. Kay, et al. Is pre-assessment for anti-TNF therapy in RA necessary in the UK? Analysis of DAS28 in six centres Rheumatology, October 1, 2007; 46(10): 1557 - 1559. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Combination therapy for early rheumatoid arthritis DTB, November 1, 2006; 44(11): 81 - 85. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|