What is the best biological treatment for rheumatoid arthritis? A systematic review of effectiveness

Table 2 Characteristics of included studies

Nstudy	Ref.	Type of study	Time horizon	Patient	Intervention	Country conducting the study	Funding Sources	Duration of the study (mo)	Follow-up (mo)
1	Geborek et al[12]	Cohort	Prospective	Naive	ETA vs IFX vs LEF	Sweden	NR	24	12
2	Van Vollenhoven et al[13]	Registry	Prospective	NR	ETA vs ETA + MTX	Sweden	Mixed	NR	12
3	Cohen et al[14]	Cohort	Retrospective	Therapeutic failure	IFX vs ETA	France	NR	48	3
4	Finckh et al[15]	Registry	Prospective	Mixed	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Switzerland	Mixed	80	12
5	Heiberg et al[16]	Cohort	Prospective	Mixed	ADA monotherapy vs ADA + MTX	Norway	Mixed	NR	12
6	Hyrich et al[17,18]	Registry	Prospective	NR	ETA monotherapy vs ETA + MTX vs ETA + DMARD and ADA monotherapy vs ADA + MTX vs ADA + DMARD	England	Pharmaceutical industry	NR	6
7	Kristensen et al[19]	Cohort	Prospective	Naive	ETA vs IFX	Sweden	Mixed	55	36
8	Bernal Rivera et al[20]	Cohort	Prospective	Naive	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Spain	NR	24	12
9	Kristensen et al[19]	Cohort	Prospective	Naive	ETA vs IFX	Spain	NR	72	6
10	Radstake et al[23]	Cohort	Prospective	NR	IFX vs ADA	The Netherlands	Mixed	NR	6
12	Bazzani et al[24]	Registry	Prospective	Mixed	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Italy	Pharmaceutical industry	25.29	36
13	Greenwood et al[47]	Cohort	Retrospective	NR	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	England	NR	NR	12
14	Laas et al[25]	Cohort	Prospective	Naive	ETA vs ADA	Finland	No pharmaceutical industry	36	3
15	Arenere Mendoza et al[26]	Cohort	Retrospective	Mixed	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Spain	NR	80	12
16	Buch et al[46]	Cohort	Prospective	Therapeutic failure	RTX vs anti-TNF	England	NR	NR	6
17	Canhão et al[27]	Registry	Prospective	Naive	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Portugal	Mixed	NR	12
18	Hetland et al[28]	Registry	Prospective	Naive	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Denmark	Mixed	86	12
19	Blom et al[29]	Registry	Prospective	Therapeutic failure	RTX vs anti-TNF	The Netherlands	Mixed	NR	12
20	Chatzidionysiou et al[30]	Registry	Prospective	Mixed	RTX monotherapy vs RTX + MTX vs RTX + LEF	Europe	Pharmaceutical industry	NR	12
21	Gotenberg et al[45]	Registry	Prospective	Mixed	RTX vs ABAT	France	NR	NR	6
22	Iannone et al[32]	Registry	Prospective	NR	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Italy	NR	NR	48
23	Leffers et al[33]	Registry	Prospective	Mixed	ABAT vs TOCI	Denmark	Mixed	NR	48
24	Martínez-Pérez et al[44]	Cohort	Retrospective	Mixed	RTX vs IFX	Spain	NR	NR	12
25	Wakabayashi et al[34]	Cohort	Retrospective	Therapeutic failure	TOCI vs ETA	Japan	No pharmaceutical industry	60	12
26	Finckh et al[36]	Cohort	Prospective	Therapeutic failure	RTX vs anti-TNF	Switzerland	Mixed	NR	24
27	Gomez-Reino et al[35]	Cohort	Prospective	Therapeutic failure	RTX vs anti-TNF	Spain	Pharmaceutical industry	36	12
28	Greenberg et al[37]	Registry	Prospective	Naive	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Unied States	Mixed	74	24
29	Kekow et al[38]	Cohort	Retrospective	Therapeutic failure	RTX vs anti-TNF	Germany	Pharmaceutical industry	NR	6
30	Schabert et al[39]	Cohort	Retrospective	NR	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Unied States	Mixed	15	12
31	Chatzidionysiou et al[40]	Registry	Prospective	Therapeutic failure	Anti-TNF vs ETA vs ADA	Stockholm	NR	NR	6
32	Keystone et al[43]	Cohort	Retrospective	Therapeutic failure	ABAT vs TOCI	Canada	NR	NR	12
33	Emery et al[41]	Cohort	Prospective	Therapeutic failure	RTX vs anti-TNF	Multicentre	Mixed	NR	12
34	Flouri et al[42]	Registry	Prospective	Mixed	ADA vs ETA vs IFX	Greece	Mixed	60	12
35	Harrold et al[31]	Registry	Prospective	Therapeutic failure	ABAT vs TOCI	Unied States	Mixed	NR	12

ADA: Adalimumab; ETA: Etanercept; IFX: Infliximab; RTX: Rituximab; ABAT: Abatacept; TOCI: Tocililizumab; LEF: Leflunomid; MTX: Methotrexate; sDMARD: Synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs; NR: Not reported.