Rheumatology Advance Access published online on March 23, 2004
Rheumatology, doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keh140
Rheumatology © British Society for Rheumatology 2004; all rights reserved
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Original Papers
1 Division of Immunology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA
* Corresponding author. E-mail: Vstrand{at}aol.com.
Received 22 August 2003
; accepted 23 December 2003
Background. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have used patient- and physician-reported outcomes, ESR and/or CRP as components of ACR response criteria to assess efficacy. Objectives. Mean changes from baseline in patient- and physician-reported outcome measures, ESR and CRP were compared in two RCTs in patients with active RA. Comparisons between active and placebo treatment used mean percentage improvements and standard effect sizes (SESs). Results. In both protocols, patient-reported assessments of disease activity, pain and physical function reflected little or no improvement with placebo, best discriminating between active and placebo therapy, as did ESR and CRP. Conclusion. Improvements in signs and symptoms of active RA in placebo RCTs appear to be best reflected by patient-reported measures of physical function, as long as reported changes in global assessments of disease activity and/or pain reflect similar benefit. Patient-reported outcome measures should be considered objective; treatment-associated changes are congruent with measures of inflammation, and appear less susceptible to the placebo response.
Key words: Placebo effect, Rheumatoid arthritis, Patient-reported outcome measures, ACR response criteria.
Patient-reported outcomes better discriminate active treatment from placebo in randomized controlled trials in rheumatoid arthritis
2 St Paul Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
3 Mapi Values, Boston, MA, USA
4 Centre for Rheumatic Diseases at Lainz Hospital, Vienna, Austria
5 Guy’s, King’s and St Thomas’s School of Medicine, King’s College, London, UK
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  G. Karanikolas, D. Charalambopoulos, G. Vaiopoulos, A. Andrianakos, A. Rapti, D. Karras, E. Kaskani, and P. P. Sfikakis Adjunctive anakinra in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate, or leflunomide, or cyclosporin-A monotherapy: a 48-week, comparative, prospective study Rheumatology, June 28, 2008; (2008) ken223v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Y. P M Goekoop-Ruiterman, J. K de Vries-Bouwstra, C. F Allaart, P. J S M Kerstens, B. A M Grillet, M. H de Jager, K H. Han, I. Speyer, P. A H M van der Lubbe, P. E H Seys, et al. Patient preferences for treatment: report from a randomised comparison of treatment strategies in early rheumatoid arthritis (BeSt trial) Ann Rheum Dis, September 1, 2007; 66(9): 1227 - 1232. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Strand, A. Balbir-Gurman, K. Pavelka, P. Emery, N. Li, M. Yin, P. B. Lehane, and S. Agarwal Sustained benefit in rheumatoid arthritis following one course of rituximab: improvements in physical function over 2 years Rheumatology, December 1, 2006; 45(12): 1505 - 1513. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|