Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Apr 18;75(9):1595–1598. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209383

Table 1. Summary of all included studies in the meta-analysis and the characteristics of patients.

Author (year) Biologic Biologic branch-MTX combination RA Duration (months) Total subjects MTX Subjects Biologic Subjects* Biologic reported superior
Bathon (2000) ETN monotherapy 12 632 217 208/207 N/Ya
Bong Lee (2014) TOFA monotherapy 36 956 186 373/397 Y
Breedveld (2006) ADA monotherapy 8 799 257 274 N
Combined 268 Y
Burmester (2015) TCZ monotherapy 6 1157 287 292 Y
Combined 291 Y
Detert (2013)b ADA Combined 2 172 85 87 Y
Durez (2007) INF Combined 4 44 14 15 Y
Emery (2008) ETN Combined 10 528 263 268 Y
Emery (2009) GLM monotherapycombined 48 637 160 159 N
159/159 Y
Jones (2009)c TCZ monotherapy 72 673 284 288 Y
Smolen (2014) ADA Combined 3 1032 517 515 Y
St Clair (2004) INF Combined 11 1049 298 373 Y
Tak (2010) RTX Combined 11 748 249 251 Y
Westhovens (2009) ABA Combined 6 509 253 256 Y

ABA, abatacept; ADA, adalimumab; CZP, certolizumab; ETA, etanercept; GLM, golimumab; INF, infliximab; RTX, rituximab; TCZ, tocilizumab; TOFA, tofacitinib; Mono, monotherapy; Comb, combined therapy; inj, injectable.

a

activity scores were not superior at follow up but the study conclusion states the biologic is beneficial due more rapid effect and less radiologic progression

b

trial not sponsored by industry

c

there was also a branch that received placebo 12wks and then tcz 12 wks. It was not included due to the short follow up using tcz

*

two numbers in a same trial correspond to different dose branches