| Title |
Golimumab in radiographic and nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis: a review of clinical trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s107587 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eric Toussirot, Charline Vauchy, Delphine Binda, Fabrice Michel |
| Abstract |
Axial spondyloarthritis (Ax SpA) refers to chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases that mainly affect the axial skeleton, leading to erosions and new bone formation in the sacroiliac joints and/or the spine. Ax SpA includes the radiographic form of the disease, ie, ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and the nonradiographic Ax SpA (non-Rx Ax SpA) forms. Anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) agents are used in the treatment of Ax SpA in patients who do not respond to or are intolerant to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In these patients, anti-TNFα agents show promising results by targeting the inflammatory process and providing symptomatic relief. Golimumab is a fully human anti-TNFα agent that is currently approved for the treatment of both AS and non-Rx Ax SpA in Europe. This review focuses on the results of clinical trials with golimumab for the treatment of AS (GO-RAISE studies) and non-Rx Ax SpA (GO-AHEAD study) and on the effects of this agent on imaging findings (radiographic progression, magnetic resonance imaging inflammation) as well as on biological parameters. Overall, golimumab is a valid therapeutic option in patients with AS and non-Rx Ax SpA in Europe. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Professor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 48% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,437
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,528
of 367,255 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#38
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,255 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.