4.7 Article

Health-related quality of life during natalizumab maintenance therapy for Crohn's disease

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 102, 期 12, 页码 2737-2746

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01508.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the effects of treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) during a randomized controlled trial of natalizumab maintenance therapy (ENACT-2) using both disease-specific and generic measures. METHODS: Crohn's disease patients who received natalizumab as induction therapy in ENACT-1 (N = 724) and responded (N = 339) were re-randomized to ENACT-2 in which they received natalizumab 300 mg (N = 168) or placebo (N = 171) every 4 wk for 48 additional wk. Outcome measures were the change from baseline on the inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire (IBDQ), the short form-36 (SF-36), the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), and a subject global assessment. RESULTS: At entry into ENACT-1, scores indicated substantially impaired HRQoL for both the disease-specific and general measures. Natalizumab responders showed clinically meaningful improvement in HRQoL over the course of the ENACT-1 study. During maintenance therapy, IBDQ and SF-36 scale scores of patients who responded to natalizumab induction and were re-randomized to receive the drug in ENACT-2 (N = 168) remained stable, while those re-randomized to placebo (N = 171) worsened. At week 60, 48 wk after the initiation of maintenance therapy, the mean change from ENACT-1 baseline of all scales of the IBDQ and the SF-36 was significantly higher for those who continued to receive natalizumab (P < 0.001 for all scales). The scores of patients who received maintenance natalizumab treatment were not statistically different from those of a cross-section of the U.S. population for 6 of 8 scales of the SF-36. CONCLUSIONS: The substantial improvement in HRQoL experienced by patients who responded to natalizumab induction therapy was maintained during an additional 48 wk of maintenance therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据