Current medical research and opinion
-
Review Comparative Study
Systematic review of tapentadol in chronic severe pain.
A systematic review of chronic pain treatment with strong opioids (step 3 WHO pain ladder) and a comparison to a new drug recently approved for the treatment of severe chronic pain in Europe, tapentadol (Palexia, Nucynta*), were performed. ⋯ Taken together, the benefit-risk ratio of tapentadol appears to be improved compared to step 3 opioids.
-
Review Comparative Study
A mixed treatment comparison of the short-term efficacy of biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in established rheumatoid arthritis.
The short-term efficacy of biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for the treatment of established moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been demonstrated by various randomized placebo or active treatment controlled trials. However, there is a lack of direct comparison of these agents. ⋯ The analyses, using MTC of efficacy of nine bDMARDs suggest that treatment with anakinra is inferior to other bDMARDs and that etanercept and certolizumab may be more effective than other bDMARDs. There are some limitations of our analyses due to MTC assumptions, variations in trial design and the fact that only ACR outcomes at six months were included.
-
Review Comparative Study
A mixed treatment comparison of the short-term efficacy of biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in established rheumatoid arthritis.
The short-term efficacy of biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for the treatment of established moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been demonstrated by various randomized placebo or active treatment controlled trials. However, there is a lack of direct comparison of these agents. ⋯ The analyses, using MTC of efficacy of nine bDMARDs suggest that treatment with anakinra is inferior to other bDMARDs and that etanercept and certolizumab may be more effective than other bDMARDs. There are some limitations of our analyses due to MTC assumptions, variations in trial design and the fact that only ACR outcomes at six months were included.