You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 296 No. 18, November 8, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (12)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Quality of Care
 •Evidence-Based Medicine
 •Rheumatology
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Randomized Controlled Trial
 •Rheumatoid Arthritis
 •Drug Therapy
 •Adverse Effects
 •Hematology/ Hematologic Malignancies
 •Leukemias/ Lymphomas
 •Immunology
 •Immunologic Disorders
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Risk of Serious Infections and Malignancies With Anti-TNF Antibody Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: Dr Bongartz and colleagues1 reported the results of a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of the TNF-blocking monoclonal antibodies infliximab and adalimumab, finding an increased risk of serious infections and malignancies associated with their use. However, previous meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials of infliximab and adalimumab were conducted at the request of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), leading to revised product labeling for infliximab in September 2005 and for adalimumab in October 2005.

The FDA-requested analyses differ in several important respects from that of Bongartz et al. First, the FDA requested that the analyses be adjusted for duration of exposure, since a greater dropout rate in the control arms than in the TNF-blocker arm (due to lack of efficacy) hinders subsequent ascertainment of events in the control arm. Second, the FDA requested meta-analyses for all 3 approved TNF-blockers, including etanercept, not just the TNF-blocking monoclonal . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Sarah K. Okada, MD; Jeffrey N. Siegel, MD
Jeffrey.Siegel@fda.hhs.gov
Division of Anesthesia, Analgesia, and Rheumatology Products
Office of Drug Evaluation II
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
US Food and Drug Administration
Silver Spring, Md



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Updated consensus statement on biological agents for the treatment of rheumatic diseases, 2008
Furst et al.
Ann Rheum Dis 2008;67:iii2-iii25.
FULL TEXT  

Updated consensus statement on biological agents for the treatment of rheumatic diseases, 2007
Furst et al.
Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:iii2-iii22.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.